State Legislatures and Redistricting

[Brittain33]

I was referring more to the state legislature, where the Democrats have held on constantly since the 70s aside from two years after 1994.  The Democrats had complete control of the state government in 2000 IIRC, and instead opted to go for the bipartisan route, mostly because the Republicans basically told them that they'd shut down the government if the Dems tried a partisan Gerrymander.

My recollection is that the Republicans threatened to put an anti-gerrymandering referendum on the ballot if the Dems went that route, and also that the Dems did so well in 2000 that they thought it better to consolidate their gains than reach for the stars and risk losses.

[Brittain33]

I've tried to start this thread in the redistricting forum but here's where everyone ie.

These results are a disaster. Republicans have the trifecta in Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Probably in FL as well, but luckily the anti-gerrymandering referendum passed.

It's the worst it could have been, but it's not a disaster, outside of Pa. Republicans dominated the process in four of the five states in 2002 and in Indiana they already banked their gains from redistricting yesterday, although they can try to take out Donnelly. He looks like a survivor to me after yesterday.

PA-12 can still be dismantled and they can try to shore up the eastern districts, which is the best possible outcome for them, but they can't preserve their gains.

Ohio Rs have to drop two seats. One of them simply has to be an R seat. I don't see how they easily collapse Toledo, metro Cleveland, Akron, and Youngstown into just 4 seats. They'll try but it will be ugly. On the other hand, they can preserve R hegemony in Cincinnati and Columbus until the next D wave.

I don't see how Michigan gets rid of another D after their masterful job in 2002. Put Peters and Levin together? Does the population support that?

Illinois, on the other hand, will be a huge prize for Dems if Quinn can hold on. There isn't a Democratic representative between Cicero and St. Louis, and Melissa Bean just lost. Republicans drew the map last time.

[Brittain33]

That means nothing. With the three judges recalled and the House fallen, I'm sure there will be two Democrats that will waffle.

The question is whether the Democratic leader of the senate lets it come up for a vote.

[Brittain33]

I'm wondering if PA-13 might be the eliminated district.  Westmoreland County is rapidly turning into East Prussia.    Since I grew up there, I'll have to change my screen name to J von J.  

You can't eliminate two Philadelphia districts in two successive redistrictings. The population doesn't support it.

A district in the west has to go. Likely PA-12. But I am curious what they'll do in the northeast and southeast. Maybe they can clean up PA-6.

[Brittain33]

Minnesota House and Senate (WTF?!)

wut. BRTD how did this happen?!

The Minnesota legislature swung very big on national partisan swings all through this decade. I'm not surprised.

[Brittain33]

Too early to predict VA Senate without seeing the remap and someone looking at the seats Dems already hold. The current map is an R gerrymander vs. the D Senate was elected in more congenial times for Dems.

[Brittain33]

I think pretty much all (if not all) of these were single seat changes, so localised races could have swung the difference.

This is what happened in Mass.: the Republican LG candidate was from a Democratic-leaning district so was replaced with a Democrat. Yet it's a sign of Republican underperformance here that they couldn't defeat any incumbent Democratic senators, despite trying.

[Brittain33]

People cite 2006 and 2008 as examples of ambitious Republican gerrymandering failing in many states, but a good gerrymander should not be infallible.

Yes. One thing we've seen this decade, depressing as it may be, is that gerrymanders generally don't backfire and will hold up across time. They will hold except in the case of overwhelming pressure for the other party, and then can just as easily go back to the planned outcome. People talked about Georgia backfiring in 2002 or Pennsylvania doing so in 2006, but they functioned as planned, up to a certain level of partisan change or partisan wave.

[Brittain33]

Given the state of the N.Y. Senate, the Dems should be at least trying to woo one Republican senator over to their side with the promise of a safe district and some power.

[Brittain33]

Given the state of the N.Y. Senate, the Dems should be at least trying to woo one Republican senator over to their side with the promise of a safe district and some power.

Couldn't Republicans do just the same?

Redistricting and NY's demographics are going to make it difficult to hold their majority in the long term, even if they get another shot to draw the maps for their chamber. The long-term stock for NY Republicans is about as good as that of Mississippi Democrats. Life in the minority in either chamber of the NY legislature is dismal, too.

[Brittain33]

Reports of the NY Republican demise are greatly exaggerated.  If they can win back the suburbs, they will retain control of the State Senate through the decade.  That rebuilding process began in 2009 and continued to grow in 2010. 

They needed a heavily gerrymandered map and a Republican wave year to get above parity and hold onto 32-30. The next map, even if drawn by Republicans to continue to crack Long Island's minority communities and upstate Democratic districts, will be hampered by the law change making it impossible to county downstate prisoners as residents of underpopulated northern Republican districts. The Democrats aren't holding any untenable districts that I know of, considering that Aubertine and the guy on Suffolk County lost, while the Republican in Buffalo is in a weak position and there are Republicans representing places like Rochester and central Nassau who would be in tough shape even if the suburbs started voting like it was 1988 again.

We'll see what happens next year when we have new maps (likely drawn by Republicans, although with difficulty) and a Presidential election year.

[Brittain33]

Can the New York State Senate (and the New York State Assembly) redistrict itself without requiring the approval of either the other chamber or the Governor?

I don't recall anyone answering this question.

I'm pretty sure the answer is no.

[Brittain33]

http://www.denverpost.com/legislature/ci_16653887

Looks like Colorado Republicans have both House and Legislature control.  That was the last race called, and it was close.

Hmm? Based on the "only toehold" comment in the article, I would expect the Dems still control the state senate.

[Brittain33]

The GOP in the Texas House will pick up either one or two seats this week, giving them a 2/3 supermajority.

In what way are they picking up seats? Run-off, party switches?

What does a 2/3 majority bring?

[Brittain33]

From a practical standpoint, I would think the 2/3rds majority means that the Democrats can't run to Ardmore OK to stop redistrciting from occuring.  The 100 Republicans would constitute a quorum.

If they actually wanted to do this, they presumably could.  The Democrats still have 12 out of 31 seats in the State Senate.  I don't think they would have anything to gain by making a scene anyway, though.

Yes, given the status quo maps are already a Perrymander, the difference between a court-drawn map and one drawn by a Republican legislature will not compare to the differences effected by Delay's 2004 remap or the redrawing of the legislature.

[Brittain33]

Is Peña angling for a gubernatorial appointment after he's served his purpose in this term of the legislature? Was he paid off somehow? He won't be reelected in this district, so it won't serve his political career, but I could see him finding an alternative to being a minority party legislator appealing.