US House Redistricting: Pennsylvania

[So the Heroes Fall]

I just noticed Springfield voted for McCain. That's...wow. Really not what I would've expected.

[Keystone Phil]

Pitts may well retire soon enough - he's going to be 73 in 2012.

He was vying for some major Committee or Subcommittee Chairmanship. Not sure if he got it but if he did, he'll be around for awhile longer.

By the way, I like Johnny's map for Southeastern PA. It puts me just barely into PA 8. 

[Sibboleth]

The map is fascinating but very risky. I wonder whether, after eventually getting burned by their own handiwork last time round*, the PA Republicans have the stomach for trying something like that again? Mind you, I suspect that your map is much more competent than what was drawn for 2002, but this issue is one reason why the process of gerrymandering can be so interesting.

*They would have done about as well in 2010 with a sane looking map as with the actual one, so it isn't as though it ever came good for them.

[Torie]

The map is fascinating but very risky. I wonder whether, after eventually getting burned by their own handiwork last time round*, the PA Republicans have the stomach for trying something like that again? Mind you, I suspect that your map is much more competent than what was drawn for 2002, but this issue is one reason why the process of gerrymandering can be so interesting.

*They would have done about as well in 2010 with a sane looking map as with the actual one, so it isn't as though it ever came good for them.

How is the map risky? As I noted somewhere, the GOP made the big mistake of thinking PA-13 could be made competitive last time. I did not make that mistake obviously this time, and neither will the Pubbies. This time, it just wanders around, sucking up every 55% and over Obama precinct within reach, and manages to get most of them.

 In any event, it is the best one can do, if one does not wish to make one of the Pubbie incumbents walk the plank. And there is so much marginal territory around Philly, that tossing a Pubbie really is not going to make the GOP CD's that remain all that much more Republican. With most of the 55% and over Obama precincts  locked up in the Dem pack CD's, what remains is fairly monochromatic.

I am quite confident that this is the map that will be drawn, since Holden (PA-17) has made very clear that he cannot be defeated (he won 56% this time, in a 51% McCain CD), and is not going anywhere, so why not unlock the bulk of his Pubbies and put them to better use elsewhere,  while locking in a bunch of Dems in northeastern PA?  In that sense, the map almost draws itself. I was also very careful to make sure that Holden would not be tempted to run in PA-15, which takes in a lot of his old territory. He lost the areas in his existing CD that are now in CD-15 by 52-48, and he would be slaughtered in Lehigh County, Dent's home base (with Dent being a very competent politician to boot), which has been shorn of most of its Dem precincts. (You also might notice that I neutralized the heavily Dem City of Harrisburg by putting it in PA-05, which is certainly not a district that Holden would choose to run in.) Plus I left Holden's core area in Schuylkill County in his new CD.

So far, for all three states that I have drawn, in the end, given all of the considerations, there is really only one map to draw that makes much sense.

[dpmapper]

I wouldn't be too confident that Holden is unbeatable.  One thing that hasn't been tried yet is chopping up Schuylkill County so that he only has a third of it.  As that is the only county in which he seriously outperforms the Obama vote share (by about 40% if memory serves - he outperforms Obama elsewhere but not by nearly as much), Holden without most of Schuylkill might be like Samson without his hair.  

In addition, as I mentioned before, I suspect local tradition dictates that York and Lancaster counties stay mostly whole (and separate, but that would happen in any GOP gerrymander anyway).  Maybe  Phil would like to weigh in on that point?  He's probably lived in the state longer than I have.  

[Torie]

I wouldn't be too confident that Holden is unbeatable.  One thing that hasn't been tried yet is chopping up Schuylkill County so that he only has a third of it.  As that is the only county in which he seriously outperforms the Obama vote share (by about 40% if memory serves - he outperforms Obama elsewhere but not by nearly as much), Holden without most of Schuylkill might be like Samson without his hair.  

In addition, as I mentioned before, I suspect local tradition dictates that York and Lancaster counties stay mostly whole (and separate, but that would happen in any GOP gerrymander anyway).  Maybe  Phil would like to weigh in on that point?  He's probably lived in the state longer than I have.  

Holden carried his CD in 2010, a GOP wave year, even if you exclude Schuylkill - by 10,000 votes. The real jewel in his crown, when you are talking about raw numbers, is the City of Harrisburg.

You cannot leave York and Lancaster whole, without leaving CD-06 and CD-07 very vulnerable to the Dems picking them up, and the GOP is just not going to stand for that. Those two CD's desperately need some heavily GOP precincts in Lancaster. In addition, since the CD that was eliminated is in the West, there is a population vacuum there, generating a demographic push for the eastern CD's to move west in any event to fill it as it were.

 I don't think PA really has any traditions, other than maximizing the partisan advantage, or keeping alive someone they consider to be a useful Dem, like Murtha (yes the Pubbies once considered him useful, before he turned into a Dem demon).

[dpmapper]

I know that this makes it harder to help districts 6 and 7, and if there indeed is no such tradition then I'm all for breaking Lancaster.  I was just trying to point it out. 

Incidentally you can add 5-6 points of McCain performance to both of them by pushing into Berks and Lebanon instead of Lancaster (see my map).  That gets them almost to the same levels as you have. 

Besides, I wouldn't think Gerlach and Dent need much help.  (Meehan is a different story.)

[Torie]

I know that this makes it harder to help districts 6 and 7, and if there indeed is no such tradition then I'm all for breaking Lancaster.  I was just trying to point it out.  

Incidentally you can add 5-6 points of McCain performance to both of them by pushing into Berks and Lebanon instead of Lancaster (see my map).  That gets them almost to the same levels as you have.  

Besides, I wouldn't think Gerlach and Dent need much help.  (Meehan is a different story.)

Where is your map? Of course, I would enjoy seeing it, now that I know the lay of the land, as it were. Actually, a majority of the Pubbie precincts in Berks are used in my map to help PA-06. The balance of the Pubbie precincts go to PA-15. If you use all of Berks (sans Reading), and Lebanon, to try to prop up PA-06 and PA-07, what do you do then to bail out PA-15 (and boy does it need bailing out), which is what I used those two counties for?  And then there is PA-11, which is a really sick puppy. A Pubbie is there solely because of a wave, and a flawed incumbent, just awash in negative publicity.

[dpmapper]

Posts 47 & 51. 

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=126739.msg2715604#msg2715604

If I did it again I'd do a better job packing the Pittsburgh district - you can probably get another point or two into the GOP districts going up the river valleys like you have it.  You're right that PA-11 is a problem; I'm not sure whether swinging it 3-4 points like I did will be enough, but it should at least give Barletta a fighting chance. 

Dent hasn't had a close election yet, and that includes some good Dem years.  There's no need to up his McCain % by 9. 

[Sibboleth]

How is the map risky?

Because partisan identity in much of PA isn't solid enough these days, basically. You've created a lot of districts that would be safe enough most of the time, but might be horribly vulnerable in a wave or the incumbent is naughty is caught being naughty.

Though all of that is fine, actually, if the point is to maximise GOP congressional representation in an average year; it'd be hard to do much better in that regard. The interesting issue wrt redistricting is that that might not be the goal of the people who actually draw the maps.

As I noted somewhere, the GOP made the big mistake of thinking PA-13 could be made competitive last time.

It was slightly weirder than that; it's like they were trying to do two things with that district at once.

[Torie]

Yes, with PA-13 last time they wanted to pick up some Dem precincts in Montco to help PA-06, that were not the most Dem (if those could be put into PA-02), appending that to a once more GOP northeast Philly,  transfixed by the days when a Pubbie actually was able to win NE Philly, and thinking somehow that whomever the Montco Dems nominated would be culturally incompatible with lower middle class Catholic NE Philly. As I said, the story line was fictive, but whatever.

[Torie]

Posts 47 & 51.  

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=126739.msg2715604#msg2715604

If I did it again I'd do a better job packing the Pittsburgh district - you can probably get another point or two into the GOP districts going up the river valleys like you have it.  You're right that PA-11 is a problem; I'm not sure whether swinging it 3-4 points like I did will be enough, but it should at least give Barletta a fighting chance.  

Dent hasn't had a close election yet, and that includes some good Dem years.  There's no need to up his McCain % by 9.  

Dent only got 54% of the vote this time in a GOP wave year (yes, there was a weird 3rd party candidate this time who got quite a number of votes, which muddies the waters). Not particularly good, particularly given that Dent is so talented a politician (he and Gerlach are the congressional Pubbie Titans really in the PA delegation).  

In any event, assuming that the Pubbie incumbents in some of these marginal to lean Dem CD's will hang around for 10 years in my view is in and of itself a mistake, except at the margins (one reason why I made CD-07 (Meehan) a bit more GOP than CD-6 (Gerlach) - which was deliberate - was because of who the incumbents are, so it does have some impact). That is particularly true with talented ones, who will have opportunities to run for higher office, or get some other important job. Will Gerlach run against Casey in 2012?  How about Dent?  Of course, if the Pubbie line drawers know, that may influence matters.

I looked at your map. For starters, Fitzpatrick in CD-08 would be at least a 50-50 shot for the Dems to knock off in 2012, if Obama is competitive. And Barletta in CD-11 will more likely than not lose. His opponent won't be Kanjorski, and it probably won't be a GOP wave year. And yes, Holden would probably have a 50-50 shot against Marino, or close to it, and probably go for it.

I recall in 2001 reading a Holden interview in which he said he very carefully considered whether he would run against Gekas in CD-17, or just throw in the towel. (His CD was thrown together with Gekas's.) Bush in 2000 had won the CD by 57%. He looked at the numbers very carefully. He said that if that CD had been drawn to be but one more point GOP, then he just didn't see a window to victory, after penciling in the above partisan baseline pad that he expected to get in Schuylkill and Harrisburg (where he campaigned in front of the cameras visiting black neighborhoods that Gekas had never set foot in during his very long Congressional tenure). So Holden ran against Gekas, and guess what?  He got 51%. He knows how to do the maths, as the Brits would say. Thus I did him the honor of doing what he would do - in advance, and trying my best not to be doing it wearing rose colored Pubbie glasses.

This time you are offering him up a 55% McCain district, and a very flawed incumbent, more flawed than Gekas.  And while you have shorn Holden of part of Schuylkill, unfortunately it is a very heavily GOP part of Schuylkill which Holden probably only carried by a small margin, leaving him with two thirds, including all the most Dem parts of Schuylkill, which overall he probably carried by 70% this time, and against Marino next time would probably hit 80%.  Moreover, I think he would be intrigued with the idea of thwarting the GOP's gerrymandering games  twice. That will make him legendary in the annuls of political history, and his immortality would be secured. What would you do in his shoes?  

[Keystone Phil]

 

In addition, as I mentioned before, I suspect local tradition dictates that York and Lancaster counties stay mostly whole (and separate, but that would happen in any GOP gerrymander anyway).  Maybe  Phil would like to weigh in on that point?  He's probably lived in the state longer than I have.  

Not sure what happens over there. I'll concede that I don't know too many details about the 16th and 19th districts.

Here's what I'll warn everyone though: don't look at these maps and say, "This is how I expect things to go." Don't forget the political process here and, from what I hear, there is at least one interesting idea being floated that hasn't been discussed by many.

and thinking somehow that whomever the Montco Dems nominated would be culturally incompatible with lower middle class Catholic NE Philly. As I said, the story line was fictive, but whatever.

It was the other way around. PA 13 was made the way it was to create problems between Borski and Hoeffel. They expected Hoeffel to be forced out or, probably more interestingly, setting up a Borski vs. Hoeffel primary which Borski would have won because of the more Democratic Northeast Philadelphia. They thought Borski wouldn't play well in Montco. That was screwed up when Borski retired. They did think Hoeffel would have problems in the NE but that wasn't the original plan.

Dent only got 54% of the vote this time in a GOP wave year (yes, there was a weird 3rd party candidate this time who got quite a number of votes, which muddies the waters). Not particularly good, particularly given that Dent is so talented a politician (he and Gerlach are the congressional Pubbie Titans really in the PA delegation).

That third party candidate was the real problem. If he wasn't there, Dent was going to demolish Callahan despite Callahan being hyped as an absolutely amazing candidate for the Dems. 

Will Gerlach run against Casey in 2012?  How about Dent?  Of course, if the Pubbie line drawers know, that may influence matters.

Dent won't waste his time. The party won't allow two U.S. Senators from the Lehigh Valley though it would be funny if it happened since Toomey is the first one we've had since the mid 1800s.

Gerlach is a strong possibility since his 2010 run for Governor was apparently a set up for 2012 but with seniority in the House, good committee spots and maybe a safer House seat, he might skip an uphill battle against Casey.

[Torie]

You are absolutely right about PA-13 Phil, now that you spelled it out for me. That of course is an even bigger fantasy - that the registered Dem liberals in Montco at that time (and back then it was more true that only really committed Dems registered Dem in Montco rather than GOP, because they wanted a say in local office elections, or something), with a considerable number of Jews involved, would vote against [for] a Pubbie over Borski.  That seems so ludicrous to me, that I suspect that is why my faltering mind got it reversed. The reverse is more plausible to me; well both are implausible, but the reverse perhaps a bit less so.  

If I am missing some political angle here, hopefully I will pick up the buzz in due course (maybe when I manage to hook up with some insider to show him my map), since whatever it is that you know, you clearly won't tell me.

Hey, is Holden considering switching parties?  

PS: Regarding Dent, in googling him that was a story about a poll showing that if Towne, the third party candidate, were not on the ballot, his vote should have split between Dent and Callahan. FWIW anyway. Yes, that would get Dent up to 60% I admit. It still frightens me to draw a CD that only he can hold however, unless it is another very good Pubbie election cycle at the time.

[Keystone Phil]

You are absolutely right about PA-13 Phil, now that you spelled it out for me. That of course is an even bigger fantasy - that the registered Dem liberals in Montco at that time (and back then it was more true that only really committed Dems registered Dem in Montco rather than GOP, because they wanted a say in local office elections, or something), with a considerable number of Jews involved, would vote against a Pubbie over Borski.

Would vote "for" a Republican over Borksi. 

 

That seems so ludicrous to me, that I suspect that is why my faltering mind got it reversed. The reverse is more plausible to me; well both are implausible, but the reverse perhaps a bit less so.

But there weren't as many at the time. Remember, this was 2002, we were running a candidate with a moderate reputation and the Dems didn't really boost their numbers until a few years later. 

(maybe when I manage to hook up with some insider to show him my map), since whatever it is that you know, you clearly won't tell me.

I don't know how private the plan is supposed to be so I prefer to be cautious and not say much. 

[Torie]

Maybe I should draw a map assuming Holden switches parties. That will be quite interesting, since the map would have to consider how to make Holden get comfortable that he could win a GOP primary. If all of that occurred, then CD-17 could be cut down to say maybe a 48% McCain CD or so, and then I think I would weaken Marino in CD-10, doing both in order to try to get Barletta in CD-11 out of the danger zone (under this scenario, Dent is not going to get much help, if any). One would need to assess the electoral prospects of both Barletta, and Marino- carefully, because one of the two CD's needs to be viewed as a clear lean to the GOP at least if it opens up at some point, which means the other can at best be only marginal, with the incumbent Pubbie winning except in bad GOP years anyway, because he is viewed as competent. I wonder what Barletta's reputation is, in that regard.

I guess I will google Holden and switching parties, to see what pops up. If he has said no way, after the election, then I guess I will drop the whole idea. But, having done that, what popped up is that Congressman Pitts, who apparently is the point man on redistricting, has an interest in chatting with Holden about redistricting. Interesting!  Maybe that is just because Holden is the senior Dem of something, or maybe it suggests perhaps that either 1) he will switch parties, or 2) my map will be adopted, except that maybe it will be a bit more friendly to him, and in particular giving him all of Schuylkill.

[Keystone Phil]

Holden isn't switching.

It will be interesting to see how they deal with Barletta and Marino. The former is definitely more of a star within the party but the leadership might prefer the latter.

[Torie]

Holden isn't switching.

It will be interesting to see how they deal with Barletta and Marino. The former is definitely more of a star within the party but the leadership might prefer the latter.

Why would the leadership prefer Marino?

[Keystone Phil]

Holden isn't switching.

It will be interesting to see how they deal with Barletta and Marino. The former is definitely more of a star within the party but the leadership might prefer the latter.

Why would the leadership prefer Marino?

I think he's more of an establishment guy than Barletta. Barletta has always been more of a wildcard/more in touch with the grassroots.

[Gravis Marketing]

Holden isn't switching.

It will be interesting to see how they deal with Barletta and Marino. The former is definitely more of a star within the party but the leadership might prefer the latter.

Why would the leadership prefer Marino?

I think he's more of an establishment guy than Barletta. Barletta has always been more of a wildcard/more in touch with the grassroots.

Aren't they both problematic in their own ways? Do other Republicans in Pa. value Barletta or are they wary of him and what he represents?

[Keystone Phil]

Holden isn't switching.

It will be interesting to see how they deal with Barletta and Marino. The former is definitely more of a star within the party but the leadership might prefer the latter.

Why would the leadership prefer Marino?

I think he's more of an establishment guy than Barletta. Barletta has always been more of a wildcard/more in touch with the grassroots.

Aren't they both problematic in their own ways?

Sure but Barletta's "problems" are more ideological. Marino has...other issues.

 

Do other Republicans in Pa. value Barletta or are they wary of him and what he represents?

He is extremely popular outside of his district/region. He is very well known and has a very dedicated following. The guy could have run for any statewide office he wanted and would have been a real player.

[Torie]

Oh Barletta is the anti illegals guy, mayor of Hazelton. I remember now. I should have connected the dots when I found out where he lived. He probably will be pretty hard to beat perhaps, but his CD still needs a lot of help.

[Keystone Phil]

He probably will be pretty hard to beat perhaps, but his CD still needs a lot of help.

He's personally popular but, yeah, it would help if he had a few more Republican areas thrown in.

[So the Heroes Fall]

The thing you have to realize about PA-13 is at the time the GOP still had a pretty solid RINO base in Montco. They were hoping they could run a "moderate" candidate (though their bench of "moderates" seems to be more the "OMG THEY'RE PRO-CHOICE!" type party-line otherwise type than a true moderate) and win Montco independents and RINOs that were mostly voting Democratic then. It epic failed partially due to Borski retiring but also them not realizing at that point that Montco was gone. The Democrats made a similar mistake in Georgia figuring they could rely on conservative Democrats (though another area where they blew it that I noticed was not realizing that suburban Republican voters are not as easily swayed as rural ones.)

[Torie]

I was laughing at the scheme at the time as I recall BRTD. If they had abandoned it, they might have held PA-08 rather than lost it in due course, and they only held PA-06 because of an extremely talented candidate, Gerlach. PA-07 had different problems, and probably could not be saved as things turned south for the Pubbies in suburban Philly, no matter how it was drawn. But now with the population losses, and PA losing a seat so most of the remaining CD's need to each have more population than they have now because of that, and my trick of picking up South Philly for PA-07, it can be brought back to a pretty safe GOP status. In other words, the size of the 3 CD Dem pack can expand, and pick off most of the over 55% Obama precincts that are in Pubbie CD's - not all of them but most. All of the over 60% precincts are out however, unless needed as a connector or something, and I don't think I have any of those. Well not all; I did have to saddle Gerlach with Pottstown, and one of my goals will be to try to cut that out (making my map uglier) if he isn't going to run in PA-06 as the incumbent.

For PA-06, I am going to draw a map for the Gerlach runs for the Senate scenario (I assume he will tell the line drawers one way or the other before a decision has to be made), which pumps more Pubbies into his CD, at the expense a bit of PA-11 and PA-15, both of which while  seemingly rather close to the marginal zone in my map, apparently have strong incumbents (certainly Dent is), so they can afford to be shaved a bit, to take PA-06 more out of the danger zone if Gerlach isn't running for the seat in 2012, which I strongly suspect will be a better year for the Dems than 2010 was, even if not as good a year as 2008 (yes I know, that leaves a lot of space )