US House Redistricting: Florida

[muon2]

Florida used a publicly accessible tool for mapping 10 years ago, and they will do so again. Last week they updated their website, and provided a link to the mapping tool. The tool only has data from 10 years ago at present, but you can see how it works. Later this year the tool will be the official site for public submission of plans to the legislature.

[muon2]

With a Republican-appointed court, the Florida GOP probably has enough wiggle-room within the regulations to limit Democratic gains to (at most) nine 'reasonably safe' (at least 55.0%) seats and one swing district that leans slightly Democratic (as well about ten swing districts that lean Republican); if Bill Young chooses to run in a 'natural' St. Petersburg seat (about 56.3% Democrat), then there is a reasonable chance that he would win.  Barring a nationwide landslide, the best-case scenario for the Republicans therefore seems to be 19-8.

The VRA will enable at leat three hispanic seats (including one Democratic coastal district) and one black seat centered around Miami-Dade, and its likely that the gerrymandered Alcee Hastings seat will be protected as well.  Interestingly, it seems that the Republicans would probably do better with an Orlando vote sink than they would with a majority-black Corrine Brown district (at least it seems that way within the limitations of DRA), as the latter seems to produce two extra Democratic-leaning swing districts.

I wonder if the VRA will protect Corrine Brown's extreme gerrymander?

If were based solely on the proportion of the population there would be 6 Hispanic and 4 Black majority districts.

[muon2]

Brown's district is not VRA protected, it's not 50% Black and completely violates the amendments passed. That's why Brown was fighting so hard against it, there's no way that she could survive under a clean map.

FL-3 is over 50% black VAP by counting black alone or in combination with other races. The difficulty is keeping it over 50% while adding almost 40 K people to bring it up to the required population.

[muon2]

If my findings are correct, then I hope you're right; it just doesn't seem that there are any consistent standards for this, though.  As an example, do you think the courts would have allowed the Georgia Republicans to turn Sanford Bishop's district into a 'leaning Republican' swing district (it wouldn't have been difficult) if they so desired?  The fact that it's technically possible to make the district majority-black without any major alterations might make the courts decide in Corrine Brown's favor.  The VRA (as interpreted by the courts) trumps other redistricting regulations after all....

Bishop's district was only plurality black overall and plurality by VAP, it wasn't really protected. They could have attempted that, but it was more in their interest to put more black voters into Bishop's district to strengthen a neighboring district.

Brown's district was drawn as a Democratic vote sink. You got get it to 50%, but it would make for a very oddly drawn district, which the courts probably wouldn't like.

FL-3 is over 50% black VAP by counting black alone or in combination with other races. The difficulty is keeping it over 50% while adding almost 40 K people to bring it up to the required population.

It's about 44% Black in VAP now. With it possible to draw a compact minority-majority district in Orlando, that could clearly be seen as a successor district to Brown's current seat, at least it could to the court.

I'm not sure where you get the 44% from. The US Census 2010 data reports that the single race BVAP is 48.9% for FL-03. There is an additional 1.5% VAP who report black in combination with another race. They count as well, so the total is over 50%.

[muon2]

I'm not sure where you get the 44% from. The US Census 2010 data reports that the single race BVAP is 48.9% for FL-03. There is an additional 1.5% VAP who report black in combination with another race. They count as well, so the total is over 50%.

I was looking at the redistricting app. Even with the 50%, the shape is what is the problem. NC-12 was struck down more than once because of how it was drawn. The courts do look at compactness to some extent even for the VRA.

The courts require compactness when necessary. NC-12 in 1992 was majority-black, but it failed to show the compelling state interest that justified the shape. The version from later in the decade was not a majority-black district, and eventually survived as a political but not racial gerrymander. IL-04 has survived because the non-compact form was the only way to achieve the VRA-protected district the past 20 years, and that did count as a compelling state interest.

I used DRA to get a new CD 3 that was over 49% BVAP. It's heavily gerrymandered with thinner connectors. I'm confident that it could break 50% at the block level, and probably does already if dual race white+black are added to the total (that's the DOJ standard).

Even though its ugly, it may be needed. FL is a section 5 state and that means its is subject to the no retrogression provision. Reducing the number of black-majority districts from 3 to 2 would be retrogression, and such a plan could fail a section 5 challenge. The compactness and respect for political boundaries in the new constitutional amendment are second tier requirements and explicitly defer to protection of racial and language minorities.

[muon2]

It seems like every Republican map this cycle has had at least one Democratic vote for it, even serious gerrymanders like PA and OH. 

Out of curiosity, I wonder if any Republicans voted for the Democratic maps in IL or MD?  I believe the MA Dem map got Republican votes...

The vote in IL was on party lines.

[muon2]

In short, it would trade one gerrymander for another. I'd rather FL-05 become an entirely Jacksonville-based district, than snake to Orlando or Tallahassee, and it's just an ugly map overall.

Would this be a better map? Both the R and D maps from the legislature assumed section 5 which is no longer in effect for FL. I preserved 3 HVAP majority CDs, 1 BVAP majority CD and a majority minority CD (23). I wasn't wild about sticking Monroe with the Gulf Coast, but there is regular ferry service between Key West and Fort Myers and it allows better use of county lines without a CD that crosses the unpopulated middle. It also matches up with the urban county clusters. I've included detail of central and south FL to show how municipal boundaries are also preserved.

[muon2]

Florida has a comparable black population to Georgia, which of course has 4 black districts.  Or Texas, which also has 4 black districts. Or New York, which also has 4 black districts. It would be quite curious to see the legislature thus create a Florida map with only 2 black districts.

How concentrated a minority population is also has an impact on how easy it is to draw minority-majority districts.

Exactly. Without Section 5 the question of compactness for a VRA district looms large. When a minority only exists in a number of disconnected urban centers does Section 2 mandate the creation of a district where that minority can elect a representative of choice? If so, how much of a stretch is permitted to have a mandated minority district? If the Louisiana suit moves forward it may well provide an answer.

[muon2]

Florida has a comparable black population to Georgia, which of course has 4 black districts.  Or Texas, which also has 4 black districts. Or New York, which also has 4 black districts. It would be quite curious to see the legislature thus create a Florida map with only 2 black districts.

How concentrated a minority population is also has an impact on how easy it is to draw minority-majority districts.

Exactly. Without Section 5 the question of compactness for a VRA district looms large. When a minority only exists in a number of disconnected urban centers does Section 2 mandate the creation of a district where that minority can elect a representative of choice? If so, how much of a stretch is permitted to have a mandated minority district? If the Louisiana suit moves forward it may well provide an answer.

Whether is it mandated is separate from whether it is justified as a permissible choice made by a legislature. This is especially so when Florida has fewer districts of this type than other states.


A proposed New York State map drew a district connecting Harlem to areas in Westchester County in order to preserve the 4th black district. Harlem and Westchester County might be geographically closer than Jacksonville and Orlando but are certainly quite distinct.

A legislature can endeavor to do that and as long as they show that race was a factor but not the predominant factor for the district then it should be permissible. If the district is strangely shaped connecting disparate areas and race is the predominant factor then it would likely be thrown out like the NC-12 districts of the 1990s.

[muon2]

Florida has a comparable black population to Georgia, which of course has 4 black districts.  Or Texas, which also has 4 black districts. Or New York, which also has 4 black districts. It would be quite curious to see the legislature thus create a Florida map with only 2 black districts.

How concentrated a minority population is also has an impact on how easy it is to draw minority-majority districts.

Exactly. Without Section 5 the question of compactness for a VRA district looms large. When a minority only exists in a number of disconnected urban centers does Section 2 mandate the creation of a district where that minority can elect a representative of choice? If so, how much of a stretch is permitted to have a mandated minority district? If the Louisiana suit moves forward it may well provide an answer.

Whether is it mandated is separate from whether it is justified as a permissible choice made by a legislature. This is especially so when Florida has fewer districts of this type than other states.


A proposed New York State map drew a district connecting Harlem to areas in Westchester County in order to preserve the 4th black district. Harlem and Westchester County might be geographically closer than Jacksonville and Orlando but are certainly quite distinct.

A legislature can endeavor to do that and as long as they show that race was a factor but not the predominant factor for the district then it should be permissible. If the district is strangely shaped connecting disparate areas and race is the predominant factor then it would likely be thrown out like the NC-12 districts of the 1990s.

The Florida Constitution reiterates the federal VRA (rather than weaseling out and simply saying that federal law must be adhered to).  To diminish the ability to elect candidates of choice is the equivalent of the Section V standard.  Not diminishing the ability to elect presumably is a viable standard regardless whether maps must be precleared by the federal government or not.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I had not considered that phrase in the FL constitution as a section 5 copy, but I agree that it appears so. That raises the question of whether a state can mandate no retrogression as a standard without the requirements of section 5. A legislature can choose to implement a plan that has no retrogression as long as race is not the predominant factor. But does the mandate become a race-based standard that goes beyond what section 2 permits?