538: The Congressional Map Has A Record-Setting Bias Against Democrats

[cinyc]

As usual, those who harp on supposed Republican gerrymanders conveniently forget about Democratic gerrymanders in states like Maryland and Illinois.  There is a diary on RRH which claims that after taking Democratic gerrymanders into account, Republicans would actually gain a few seats under non-partisan maps due to self-packing.  I'm not sure I believe it, but it is intellectually dishonest to ignore Maryland and Illinois, plus the Mathismander in Arizona, if you're truly concerned about partisan gerrymandering.

I'm not a proponent of eliminating partisan gerrymandering, though, as it is an American tradition as old as Elbridge Gerry.

[cinyc]

As usual, those who harp on supposed Republican gerrymanders conveniently forget about Democratic gerrymanders in states like Maryland and Illinois.  There is a diary on RRH which claims that after taking Democratic gerrymanders into account, Republicans would actually gain a few seats under non-partisan maps due to self-packing.  I'm not sure I believe it, but it is intellectually dishonest to ignore Maryland and Illinois, plus the Mathismander in Arizona, if you're truly concerned about partisan gerrymandering.

I'm not a proponent of eliminating partisan gerrymandering, though, as it is an American tradition as old as Elbridge Gerry.

Recent non-partisan 3-part test from Princeton concluded that both Illinois and Maryland were not gerrymanders.

Here is the article: Princeton Gerrymandering Projection

According to their website, two of the three MD tests were skipped for some reason, and the Monte Carlo test showed that in most scenarios, Republicans would end up with another seat in MD.

[cinyc]

I'm not a proponent of eliminating partisan gerrymandering, though, as it is an American tradition as old as Elbridge Gerry.

You're for politicians basically stealing seats for their party just because it is a ...tradition?

...seriously?

Sorry. I don't find something that has been going on since the founding of the republic as offensive as most here seem to do. Quite frankly, a lot of the supposedly neutral redistricting criteria proposed by others are just as likely to lead to partisan Gerrymandering. Forcing "competitive" districts on states where one party's population is concentrated in a particular city or region is a dumb idea that destroys communities of interest, overrepresents the minority party and overrepresents that city or region. Supposedly "neutral" commissions almost always aren't. And court-drawn maps often take on the biases of the appointed special master.

So, no, there is no such thing as "neutral" redistricting. And I don't view partisan redistricting as "stealing" seats for any one party - what Republicans do in Ohio or Michigan can easily be offset by what Democrats do in Illinois or California, anyway.