US House Redistricting: North Carolina

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

Not that I'm surprised McHenry is being a partisan ass, but Democrats would be entitled to at least 5 seats under a "fair" map: a black-majority northeastern seat, a Charlotte seat, a Winston-Salem/Greensboro seat, a Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill seat, and a seat in south central NC, around Fayetteville. And that's not counting Shuler.

The notion that "fairness" requires a "Winston-Salem/Greensboro" seat is a joke. Objective redistricting starting at the West and moving East clearly links Winston-Salem with counties to the West, and Greensboro with counties to North, South or East. Blacks simply aren't the majority in the Northeast so "fairness" clearly does not call for a majority Black piece of spaghetti in the East. If "fairness" calls for a Black-majority seat in Eastern North Carolina, then "fairness" dictates that it include Blacks in Durham, and/or Wake county. Again, objective redistricting starting in the East and moving West splits "South-central" North Carolina around Fayetteville.

This seems pretty damn reasonable to me. I started in the west and moved east. The yellow northeastern district is 50.7% VAP black, and looks much more reasonable than the current district.

[dpmapper]

Is it really worth snaking Watt's district up to the Triad if it's only going to take in Winston-Salem? Some of those voting districts you're sending it through have a lot of GOP votes in them.  

Maybe, but the current district does the same thing, and Winston-Salem Democrats have to go somewhere.

The current district takes in not just W-S, but also much of High Point and Greensboro.  Here's the old one together with a potential new Watt district:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How? The only district it can take Democrats from is Watt's.

[/quote]

Well, if you keep Watt's the way krazen has it, you could put High Point in it pretty easily.  Or you could use Foxx's district as the one to stuff Asheville into, and have McHenry take some of west Charlotte. 

[JewCon]

Maybe, but you can ensure that both Shuler and McIntyre will 1) never be safe and 2) will vote Republican as often as possible.

And 3) Persuade them in so many words that they will find a brighter political future as newly minted Republicans.  

Which brings me to this question -what is the likelihood that either would switch parties, especially after redistricting?  

Shuler's chances of switching parties are as good as his NFL Career was.


BAM!!!!

[BigSkyBob]

Not that I'm surprised McHenry is being a partisan ass, but Democrats would be entitled to at least 5 seats under a "fair" map: a black-majority northeastern seat, a Charlotte seat, a Winston-Salem/Greensboro seat, a Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill seat, and a seat in south central NC, around Fayetteville. And that's not counting Shuler.

The notion that "fairness" requires a "Winston-Salem/Greensboro" seat is a joke. Objective redistricting starting at the West and moving East clearly links Winston-Salem with counties to the West, and Greensboro with counties to North, South or East. Blacks simply aren't the majority in the Northeast so "fairness" clearly does not call for a majority Black piece of spaghetti in the East. If "fairness" calls for a Black-majority seat in Eastern North Carolina, then "fairness" dictates that it include Blacks in Durham, and/or Wake county. Again, objective redistricting starting in the East and moving West splits "South-central" North Carolina around Fayetteville.

[

This seems pretty damn reasonable to me.

I have no doubt that partisan gerrymandering in your favor seems "reasonable" to you. Nor do I doubt that partisan gerrymander in your favor seem "fair" to you. Nor, do I doubt that partisan gerrymandering in your favor seems "objective" to you.

You have expanded a Charlotte surburban district way east to Moore county just to avoid including Northern suburbs that would result in the Northern areas including Winston-Salem.  A person using objective redistricting criteria would never include such a finger. It is a partisan results-driven  exercise.

Likewise, having a district wrap around Greensboro  is partisan-driven gerrymandering. Why objectivity demands pairing Winston-Salem and part of Greensboro in the Triad rather than Winston-Salem, Davidson County and Highpoint [Where you can pair two whole counties] is an exercise in rationalization at best, and an absurdity at worse.

In the East we see the same gerrymandering passed off as objectivity. Instead of creating a coastal district that expands inland, or a Southern tier district, you try to create a Southern tier district that excludes the Republican areas along the tier, but expands Northward to find Democrats, and a coastal district that won't expand to the next county in the South, but, expands way to the West in its Northern reaches.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, a West-to-East sweep would not have bypassed Highpoint as your map did.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here is a bit of reality for you: the district regressed! If you are going to dip into Durham and Raleigh, a 58% Black VAP population is a more appropriate minimum target, while a 65% Black population would result in Blacks selecting "the candidate of their choice" in the next election.

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

I have no doubt that partisan gerrymandering in your favor seems "reasonable" to you. Nor do I doubt that partisan gerrymander in your favor seem "fair" to you. Nor, do I doubt that partisan gerrymandering in your favor seems "objective" to you.

Firstly, let me assure you that if I were engaging in "partisan gerrymandering in [my] favor," I would do a hell of a lot better than an 8-5 Republican delegation!

You have expanded a Charlotte surburban district way east to Moore county just to avoid including Northern suburbs that would result in the Northern areas including Winston-Salem.  A person using objective redistricting criteria would never include such a finger. It is a partisan results-driven  exercise.

Actually, since I drew the green district first, I drew the green district to include Iredell and Rowan counties in order to keep the core cities of the Triad (Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and High Point) intact. These cities are an obvious community of interest that should be in the same district. The grey district is not ideal, and should not extend so far east, but with the west already drawn there is nowhere to go but east. Even if it included Anson and Richmond counties, it would still have to go into either Moore or Scotland.

Likewise, having a district wrap around Greensboro  is partisan-driven gerrymandering. Why objectivity demands pairing Winston-Salem and part of Greensboro in the Triad rather than Winston-Salem, Davidson County and Highpoint [Where you can pair two whole counties] is an exercise in rationalization at best, and an absurdity at worse.

As I've stated above, Greensboro, Winston-Salem, and High Point are the core cities of the Triad. They are why it is called a "triad" in the first place. It makes sense for them to be in the same district. The alternative is to split them and include each in a district dominated by their suburbs and exurbs. My map has a coherent district for the core cities and a coherent district for the suburbs and exurbs.

In the East we see the same gerrymandering passed off as objectivity. Instead of creating a coastal district that expands inland, or a Southern tier district, you try to create a Southern tier district that excludes the Republican areas along the tier, but expands Northward to find Democrats, and a coastal district that won't expand to the next county in the South, but, expands way to the West in its Northern reaches. 

Well, where would you put Fayetteville? It has more ties to the Southern Tier than to the coast or the Raleigh suburbs. Or are your referring to the Wilmington district? If you are, you'll find that that district is quite Republican. The northeastern district is Republican as well, especially since the black areas of Pitt and Wilson counties were put in the black district. So if I'm a Democratic hack, where's the partisan gerrymander here? The decision to split the coastal districts on a north-south basis rather than an east-west one was purely arbitrary, and the eastern part of the peach district can be exchanged for the western part of the baby blue district.

No, a West-to-East sweep would not have bypassed Highpoint as your map did.

We've been through this. High Point belongs with Greensboro and Winston-Salem more than with their suburbs and exurbs.

Here is a bit of reality for you: the district regressed! If you are going to dip into Durham and Raleigh, a 58% Black VAP population is a more appropriate minimum target, while a 65% Black population would result in Blacks selecting "the candidate of their choice" in the next election.

Here's a bit of reality for you. Blacks elected "the candidate of their choice" in 2010 (a Republican wave year) in the current district, which is only 48% black (or were you unaware that G. K. Butterfield is black? That's okay, it's an easy mistake.). The inclusion of Raleigh and Durham may mean that some more white Democrats would be in the district, but I doubt it would be enough for Butterfield or another black Democrat to lose the primary. I suppose, however, that the Wake County split is unacceptable. If we're throwing the VRA out the window for Watt, I see no reason why it should be preserved for Butterfield.

I may make changes to the map later.

[Torie]

What is all of this "fairness" chat about in the context of one party having control of drawing the lines? When that happens you gerrymander in this day and age (unless you are Mitch Daniels in Indiana who likes to play Mr. Nice Guy).

[Dgov]

What is all of this "fairness" chat about in the context of one party having control of drawing the lines? When that happens you gerrymander in this day and age (unless you are Mitch Daniels in Indiana who likes to play Mr. Nice Guy).

Even that map is sort of a Gerrymander, just a clean one (like Michigan but less skillful)

[JohnnyLongtorso]

It spawned from this post about a Patrick McHenry quote:

Politico writeup.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/54244.html


“Republicans should pick up three seats under any fair and legal map,” McHenry said. “That is huge. No other states in the nation would gain as many Republican seats. This would be in a state that Barack Obama won in 2008 and where we have had a Democratic governor since 1992 — the longest such period in the nation. A 9-4 delegation is pretty good and would attempt to avoid the risk of a bad year for Republicans. Clearly, Reps. Kissell and Miller are serving their final term.”

The Republicans in the North Carolina legislature are also claiming that they're planning on doing a "fair" map, keeping counties together, eliminating the NC-12 snake, and whatnot.

[they don't love you like i love you]

That snake district actually helps Republicans.

[Smash255]

What is all of this "fairness" chat about in the context of one party having control of drawing the lines? When that happens you gerrymander in this day and age (unless you are Mitch Daniels in Indiana who likes to play Mr. Nice Guy).

Based off McHenry's hackish as all hell comments.  Basically according to McHenry, if its an extreme GOP Gerrymander its a "fair" map, and if its anything other than a heavy GOP gerrymander, its not fair.

[BigSkyBob]

This is an "extreme" GOP gerrymander:


http://www.flickr.com/photos/51954263@N03/5700757617/

[krazen1211]

What is all of this "fairness" chat about in the context of one party having control of drawing the lines? When that happens you gerrymander in this day and age (unless you are Mitch Daniels in Indiana who likes to play Mr. Nice Guy).

Based off McHenry's hackish as all hell comments.  Basically according to McHenry, if its an extreme GOP Gerrymander its a "fair" map, and if its anything other than a heavy GOP gerrymander, its not fair.

That's actually based off a century of Democratic history. Fair map was what they said was a fair map.

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

What is all of this "fairness" chat about in the context of one party having control of drawing the lines? When that happens you gerrymander in this day and age (unless you are Mitch Daniels in Indiana who likes to play Mr. Nice Guy).

Based off McHenry's hackish as all hell comments.  Basically according to McHenry, if its an extreme GOP Gerrymander its a "fair" map, and if its anything other than a heavy GOP gerrymander, its not fair.

That's actually based off a century of Democratic history. Fair map was what they said was a fair map.

The fact that a state was a Democratic stronghold in the past has no bearing whatsoever on what constitutes a "fair" map today. Based on current regional voting patterns, a "fair" map would be 7-5-Shuler. A map that "fairly" represents the partisan breakdown of the state, based on recent statewide vote totals would be 7-6 Republican.

[JewCon]

That snake district actually helps Republicans.

I have to agree. I mean, If you get rid of the snake you'll have to give the Dems a Charlotte seat AND a Winston-Salem / Greensboro / High Point seat.

I have tried getting rid of the snake numerous times and it helps the Dems everytime.

[BigSkyBob]

That snake district actually helps Republicans.

I have to agree. I mean, If you get rid of the snake you'll have to give the Dems a Charlotte seat AND a Winston-Salem / Greensboro / High Point seat.

I have tried getting rid of the snake numerous times and it helps the Dems everytime.

Run the snake East to Chapel Hill and Durham rather than South to Charlotte. Charlotte snakes to Lumberton/Fayetteville, the First takes East Raleigh, and there you have 10-3 GOP.

[JewCon]

That snake district actually helps Republicans.

I have to agree. I mean, If you get rid of the snake you'll have to give the Dems a Charlotte seat AND a Winston-Salem / Greensboro / High Point seat.

I have tried getting rid of the snake numerous times and it helps the Dems everytime.

Run the snake East to Chapel Hill and Durham rather than South to Charlotte. Charlotte snakes to Lumberton/Fayetteville, the First takes East Raleigh, and there you have 10-3 GOP.

Nice. Good idea

[SmokingCricket]

I hate the snake and the elongated C-districts. I cannot see why in the world for the life of me that such districts are permitted (Petty partisanship aside).

Charlotte belongs by itself. The Triad should be linked together, although if you have to split it then Winston gets axed in favor of Burlington unless you want to link Burlington to Chapel Hill-Durham. Triangle would need 2 seats; logic would say Raleigh/Cary opposed to Durham/Chapel Hill. Fayetteville and Wilmington would split. After that, it would be a fairly easy geographical grouping.

[Miles]

This is my attempt at a McHenrymander with 3 VRA seats.

...needless to say, a third minority district would be a very hard sell.

Minority-Majority/Plurality districts

[JacobNC]

Here's an unrealistic map designed to get rid of our friend Patrick McHenry (take notes for 2020, NC Democratic Legislators!)





District 1: G.K. Butterfield (D-Wilson)
SAFE DEMOCRATIC

62/38 Barack Obama (formerly 62/37 Barack Obama)
65/35 Democratic

47.0% Black
46.8% White

I'm not a legal expert but I think since the 1st district fell below 50% black already it doesn't have to be 50% black next decade.  It's still black plurality.



District 2: OPEN
TILT DEMOCRATIC

51/48 Barack Obama (formerly 52/47 Barack Obama)
51/49 Democratic

67% White
21% Black
9% Hispanic

This seat follows I-40 from Raleigh to Wilmington.  It's coverage is much different from the current 2nd CD, but it's demographics are similar.  Anywho, this seat favors Democrats one of two ultra-conservatives (Renee Ellmers or Ilario Pantano) would be running here.  They both have some extremely radical views, but at least Ellmers is not a war criminal.  Ellmers barely won in a wave year against a Congressman who beat up kids on the side of the street, so she's not exactly a strong incumbent.



District 3: Walter Jones (R-Farmville)
SAFE REPUBLICAN

62/37 John McCain (formerly 61/38 John McCain)
59/41 Republican

77% White
15% Black

Walter Jones is without a doubt the biggest RINO of the 112th Congress, he's very anti-war and he voted against the Ryan budget because he wants to protect Medicare, he also voted against off-shore drilling.  I think the demographics here favor him in a Republican primary, so this district is safe for him.



District 4: OPEN SEAT
LIKELY DEMOCRATIC

55/44 Barack Obama (formerly 63/37 Barack Obama)
54/46 Democratic

64% White
22% Black
9% Hispanic

Open seat, but David Price may choose to run here since most of his current district lies within these boundaries.



District 5: OPEN SEAT
TOSS UP

50/49 Barack Obama
50/50 Republican

68% White
20% Black
9% Hispanic

Either party could win here; if Foxx runs in this district it would be lean Democratic.



District 6: Virginia Foxx (R-Banner Elk)
SAFE REPUBLICAN

68/30 John McCain
67/33 Republican

86% White

Safe Republican, but not necessarily for Foxx.  Coble, McHenry, Foxx & Ellmers might all run in this cross-state district.



District 7: Mike McIntyre (D-Lumberton) vs. Renee Ellmers (R-Dunn)
SAFE DEMOCRATIC

54/46 Barack Obama (formerly 52/47 John McCain)
57/43 Democratic

49.8% White
30.7% Black
8.9% Native American
7.7% Hispanic

This district becomes majority-minority.  McIntyre would own this district because of his popularity in the rural areas, even in a primary.  Voting record aside - he's a good fit for Fayetteville too.  Ellmers lives in this district but she probably wouldn't run here.



District 8: Larry Kissell (D-Biscoe)
TOSS UP

50/49 Barack Obama (formerly 52/47 Barack Obama)
51/48 Republican

65% White
23% Black
8% Hispanic

This is about the best district that can be drawn for Kissell.  He could win here in a general, but he's going to have a tough time anywhere in a primary.



District 9: Sue Myrick (R-Charlotte)
SAFE REPUBLICAN

61/39 McCain
64/36 Republican

82% White

The popular former Mayor of Charlotte would win very easily here.  If she retired McHenry might go for this seat.



District 10: Mel Watt (D-Charlotte) vs. Patrick McHenry (R-Cherryville)
SAFE DEMOCRATIC

58/41 Barack Obama (formerly 57/42 John McCain)
57/43 Democratic

56% White
30% Black
10% Hispanic

McHenry's district drops a lot of ground to the new 6th CD and takes in a lot of Charlotte.  Mel Watt would likely run and win here, though I don't know how he'd feel about running in a white-majority district (he once called Ralph Nader "another arrogant f***ing white man").



District 11: Heath Shuler (D-Waynesville)
SAFE DEMOCRATIC

51/48 John McCain (formerly 52/47 John McCain)
51/49 Republican

87% White

Good district for Shuler as long as he survives the primary.  A more liberal Democrat might be able to win here, too, given the trend in Asheville.



District 12: Howard Coble (R-Greensboro)
LIKELY DEMOCRATIC

56/43 Barack Obama (formerly 71/29 Barack Obama)
53/47 Democratic

69% White
19% Black

A win for Coble is not out of the question here (I think this district would've gone for Richard Burr in 2010) but Coble's pretty darn old so he might just retire.



District 13: Brad Miller (D-Raleigh)
LIKELY DEMOCRATIC

55/44 Barack Obama (formerly 59/41 Barack Obama)
53/47 Democratic

67% White
20% Black
8% Hispanic

Miller, who looks to be the loser in this year's real redistricting, would likely win in this fantasy district.

[JewCon]

I made a 9-4 map that pits Foxx (R) with Shuler (D) ; Price (D) with Miller (D) ; McIntrye (D) with Kissell (D)

NC-01 is 51.6% black
NC-12 is 44.5% to 33.5% black-white
NC-08 is 44% White to 36% Black

I'll post a map soon.

[Miles]

I made a 9-4 map that pits Foxx (R) with Shuler (D) ; Price (D) with Miller (D) ; McIntrye (D) with Kissell (D)

NC-01 is 51.6% black
NC-12 is 44.5% to 33.5% black-white
NC-08 is 44% White to 36% Black

I'll post a map soon.

Please do; I'd really like to see that.

[JewCon]

Kissell lives in Coble's district, but would be dumb to run there. He would def. run against McIntrye who has a more liberal seat, with most of Kissell's old territory.

The 4th district is my masterpiece It'll never happen, but it looks so cool!

Foxx-Shuler may actually hurt repubs, it depends if Foxx can moderate down a tinsy bit. Shuler is very popular in all of Western Carolina, so the Asheville split may not keep him down. He will lose with this map, but potetentially could come back 2 years later and win.

Overall, I think this is a clean map, 9-4 GOP. Unless Shuler wins, then 8-5.

My prediction for Foxx-Shuler with that seat:
Foxx (R): 54%
Shuler (D): 45%

He may actually run in NC-11, which is slightly less GOP and open. But, more liberal areas like Boone are in Foxx's seat.

[SmokingCricket]

That is one heck of a 4th district.

[krazen1211]

North Carolina house/senate maps partially released.

http://www.ncleg.net/gis/randr07/District_Plans/PlanPage_DB_2011.asp?Plan=Lewis_VRA_House_Districts&Body=House

http://www.ncleg.net/gis/randr07/District_Plans/PlanPage_DB_2011.asp?Plan=Rucho_Senate_VRA_Districts&Body=Senate


Odd how they chose to only release the VRA districts. Oh well, those are just about all of the Dem districts outside of a handful of white liberals in the triangle.

[edtorres04]

Wouldn't there also be a white dem sink in Ashville?