2020 Census and Redistricting: Kentucky

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Also LOL.

I really want to witness cope on here when NC passes an 11-3, KY and TN get rid of the Yarmuth/Cooper sinks respectively, and when FL passes a 19-9 or a 20-8. It shall be utterly glorious.

[DrScholl]

Also LOL.

I really want to witness cope on here when NC passes an 11-3, KY and TN get rid of the Yarmuth/Cooper sinks respectively, and when FL passes a 19-9 or a 20-8. It shall be utterly glorious.

That was a huge level of overconfidence. And KY-3 isn't even really a sink, it's a geographically compact district that just happens to lean heavily to one side of the political spectrum so that poster has no clue what they are talking about.

[Minnesota Mike]

Congressional map passed the KY Senate redistricting committee 8-2 with no debate, on to the Senate floor. They hope to have the bill passed by both houses by Saturday, the earliest possible date.

[BoiseBoy]

Congressional map passed the KY Senate redistricting committee 8-2 with no debate, on to the Senate floor. They hope to have the bill passed by both houses by Saturday, the earliest possible date.

Sad!

[Minnesota Mike]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1479194540330426375

[ProgressiveModerate]

Funny that Kentucky might end up with one of the fairest maps (from a partisanship standpoint)

[Meatball Ron]

Funny that Kentucky might end up with one of the fairest maps (from a partisanship standpoint)

From a *purely partisanship perspective*, 5-1 is actually not fair at all. Biden won 36% of the vote in KY, so he should win a comparable number of seats, which would mean 4-2 is the fairest partisan outcome.

That said, 5-1 is absolutely fair overall; you'd have to draw some really, really nasty lines to get even close to 4-2 given how concentrated the Dem vote is in the Louisville area.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Funny that Kentucky might end up with one of the fairest maps (from a partisanship standpoint)

From a *purely partisanship perspective*, 5-1 is actually not fair at all. Biden won 36% of the vote in KY, so he should win a comparable number of seats, which would mean 4-2 is the fairest partisan outcome.

That said, 5-1 is absolutely fair overall; you'd have to draw some really, really nasty lines to get even close to 4-2 given how concentrated the Dem vote is in the Louisville area.

I would agree with the second part but not with the first.

The way this forum seems to evaluate what is fair from a partisan perspective is frankly wrong as by default the majority party should always win a disproportionate share of seats. Think California for example; Trump technically got over 1/3rd of the vote share in 2020 but even just getting to 12 Trump seats a conscious effort must be made and 17 or 18 is pretty blatantly impossible without being pretty horrdendous (they’d all be pretty narrow anyways). For Kentucky, a Trump + 26 state, one would expect a 4.8 -1.2  delegation based on partisanship alone which this map basically is in net.

This makes sense as the minority party should in theory have a higher share of their votes "wasted in areas won by the majority

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1479194540330426375

Were the 4 votes Democrats or Republicans?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Funny that Kentucky might end up with one of the fairest maps (from a partisanship standpoint)

From a *purely partisanship perspective*, 5-1 is actually not fair at all. Biden won 36% of the vote in KY, so he should win a comparable number of seats, which would mean 4-2 is the fairest partisan outcome.

"Fair" in the context of FPP does not mean proportional. FPP is just not a system that can accommodate proportionality, and trying to force proportionality into it results in nonsensical monstrosities.

[Meatball Ron]

Funny that Kentucky might end up with one of the fairest maps (from a partisanship standpoint)

From a *purely partisanship perspective*, 5-1 is actually not fair at all. Biden won 36% of the vote in KY, so he should win a comparable number of seats, which would mean 4-2 is the fairest partisan outcome.

"Fair" in the context of FPP does not mean proportional. FPP is just not a system that can accommodate proportionality, and trying to force proportionality into it results in nonsensical monstrosities.

I agree, which the second part of my post (which you conveniently didn't quote) made very clear. What does fair, purely from the perspective of partisanship, mean, if not proportionality? A 5-1 in KY is fair because it makes sense given other dimensions like compactness, COI, etc. Drawing a 4-2 in KY (and one of the 2 would still be quite competitive) would require nasty, nasty lines.

[Meatball Ron]

Funny that Kentucky might end up with one of the fairest maps (from a partisanship standpoint)

From a *purely partisanship perspective*, 5-1 is actually not fair at all. Biden won 36% of the vote in KY, so he should win a comparable number of seats, which would mean 4-2 is the fairest partisan outcome.

That said, 5-1 is absolutely fair overall; you'd have to draw some really, really nasty lines to get even close to 4-2 given how concentrated the Dem vote is in the Louisville area.

I would agree with the second part but not with the first.

The way this forum seems to evaluate what is fair from a partisan perspective is frankly wrong as by default the majority party should always win a disproportionate share of seats. Think California for example; Trump technically got over 1/3rd of the vote share in 2020 but even just getting to 12 Trump seats a conscious effort must be made and 17 or 18 is pretty blatantly impossible without being pretty horrdendous (they’d all be pretty narrow anyways). For Kentucky, a Trump + 26 state, one would expect a 4.8 -1.2  delegation based on partisanship alone which this map basically is in net.

This makes sense as the minority party should in theory have a higher share of their votes "wasted in areas won by the majority

Where did 4.8 and 1.2 come from? If you used some formula to get there, please share.

Again, I am not saying 4-2 would be fair in KY. But the original poster said fair from a *purely partisanship perspective* (which is not a goal we should be after). If we're talking about that very narrow definition of fair (meaning anything other than partisanship, including COIs, compactness, etc., is excluded) then I don't see what we'd use to assess besides proportionality?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Funny that Kentucky might end up with one of the fairest maps (from a partisanship standpoint)

From a *purely partisanship perspective*, 5-1 is actually not fair at all. Biden won 36% of the vote in KY, so he should win a comparable number of seats, which would mean 4-2 is the fairest partisan outcome.

"Fair" in the context of FPP does not mean proportional. FPP is just not a system that can accommodate proportionality, and trying to force proportionality into it results in nonsensical monstrosities.

I agree, which the second part of my post (which you conveniently didn't quote) made very clear. What does fair, purely from the perspective of partisanship, mean, if not proportionality? A 5-1 in KY is fair because it makes sense given other dimensions like compactness, COI, etc. Drawing a 4-2 in KY (and one of the 2 would still be quite competitive) would require nasty, nasty lines.

That's a complex question and one that can have many dimensions depending on how far you want to take it. The most obvious requirement for partisan fairness is pretty obvious though: the partisanship median seat must match the partisanship of the whole polity. Of course, with regard to congress, that only makes sense when analyzing the national map as a whole - how the median seat in Kentucky votes has little relevance on partisan fairness. That said, it ought to be possible to develop some kind of algorithm to measure whether a given state is skewing the national median one way or the other.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Funny that Kentucky might end up with one of the fairest maps (from a partisanship standpoint)

From a *purely partisanship perspective*, 5-1 is actually not fair at all. Biden won 36% of the vote in KY, so he should win a comparable number of seats, which would mean 4-2 is the fairest partisan outcome.

That said, 5-1 is absolutely fair overall; you'd have to draw some really, really nasty lines to get even close to 4-2 given how concentrated the Dem vote is in the Louisville area.

I would agree with the second part but not with the first.

The way this forum seems to evaluate what is fair from a partisan perspective is frankly wrong as by default the majority party should always win a disproportionate share of seats. Think California for example; Trump technically got over 1/3rd of the vote share in 2020 but even just getting to 12 Trump seats a conscious effort must be made and 17 or 18 is pretty blatantly impossible without being pretty horrdendous (they’d all be pretty narrow anyways). For Kentucky, a Trump + 26 state, one would expect a 4.8 -1.2  delegation based on partisanship alone which this map basically is in net.

This makes sense as the minority party should in theory have a higher share of their votes "wasted in areas won by the majority

Where did 4.8 and 1.2 come from? If you used some formula to get there, please share.

Again, I am not saying 4-2 would be fair in KY. But the original poster said fair from a *purely partisanship perspective* (which is not a goal we should be after). If we're talking about that very narrow definition of fair (meaning anything other than partisanship, including COIs, compactness, etc., is excluded) then I don't see what we'd use to assess besides proportionality?

Formula I came up with with expected seat share under a fair map based on state partisanship. Obviously, it's imperfect, just an estimate, and varies from state to state, but overall does a pretty good job.

[Minnesota Mike]

https://twitter.com/RylandKY/status/1479821230148669444

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1483926115181895688?s=20

Beshear Veto's, but given it only takes a simple majority to override said veto, this is just perfunctory,

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

What an idiot, don't poke the bear.

[lfromnj]

What an idiot, don't poke the bear.

Its just simple override. No one cares and it looks like one of the most gerrymandered maps in the nation. Its not a terrible deal for Frankfort though. The reasonable compact option would have been Massie getting Frankfort instead but atleast its clear that Comer  will pay attention to Frankfort.

[Gass3268]

What an idiot, don't poke the bear.

Its just simple override. No one cares and it looks like one of the most gerrymandered maps in the nation. Its not a terrible deal for Frankfort though. The reasonable compact option would have been Massie getting Frankfort instead but atleast its clear that Comer  will pay attention to Frankfort.

Yeah, word is Comer is planning on (or already has) moving to Frankfort.

[politicallefty]

What an idiot, don't poke the bear.

He's not wrong though and the map is unnecessarily ugly even for its partisan aims. It's also one of six states where a veto can be overridden with a simple majority (the others being AL, AR, IN, TN, and WV).

[lfromnj]

What an idiot, don't poke the bear.

Its just simple override. No one cares and it looks like one of the most gerrymandered maps in the nation. Its not a terrible deal for Frankfort though. The reasonable compact option would have been Massie getting Frankfort instead but atleast its clear that Comer  will pay attention to Frankfort.

Yeah, word is Comer is planning on (or already has) moving to Frankfort.

Yeah it would obviously suck for Frankfort if Comer retires. Anyone else is going to hate that district. Obviously if Comer moves he still has to pay attention to the west.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

What an idiot, don't poke the bear.

He's not wrong though and the map is unnecessarily ugly even for its partisan aims. It's also one of six states where a veto can be overridden with a simple majority (the others being AL, AR, IN, TN, and WV).

It's ugly but not that partisan, they can easily draw a much less ugly "Fair map" that nukes the lousiville district if they feel spiteful.

[BoiseBoy]

Primary day may get moved to August.

https://twitter.com/BethinLouavul/status/1483997127655272449?s=20

[BoiseBoy]

Beshear's veto has been overridden in the House, 69-23.

[Skill and Chance]

Beshear's veto has been overridden in the House, 69-23.

So no last minute shenanigans.

He still shouldn't have tempted fate, though.