US House Redistricting: New York

[Brittain33]

The Buffalo CD is drawn in a non partisan way, following municipal lines, and being kept compact. Isn't that the way a court that is non partisan would do it? If a court does anything else, it has an agenda.

They may be taking incumbent protection into account.

[Torie]

The Buffalo CD is drawn in a non partisan way, following municipal lines, and being kept compact. Isn't that the way a court that is non partisan would do it? If a court does anything else, it has an agenda.

They may be taking incumbent protection into account.

If a court did that, it would be a disgrace. The NY court did not do that last time. It drew a fair map. Then the parties cut a deal, to make marginal CD's less marginal.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In a "fair" map, would Niagara Falls and Buffalo be placed into a district together or would they prefer to keep the Buffalo seat entirely within Erie county?

[muon2]

In a "fair" map, would Niagara Falls and Buffalo be placed into a district together or would they prefer to keep the Buffalo seat entirely within Erie county?

Under my rules for a fair map (similar to MI) there should be a district entirely within Erie. That forces Buffalo into the district entirely within Erie so it couldn't link to Niagara Falls. I assume that anyone mapping them linked was doing so to make a stronger R district. As it is, I ended up with an R+5 including Niagara Falls, and R+6 for the 200 K remainder of Erie so it's not that bad for the GOP.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In a "fair" map, would Niagara Falls and Buffalo be placed into a district together or would they prefer to keep the Buffalo seat entirely within Erie county?

Under my rules for a fair map (similar to MI) there should be a district entirely within Erie. That forces Buffalo into the district entirely within Erie so it couldn't link to Niagara Falls. I assume that anyone mapping them linked was doing so to make a stronger R district. As it is, I ended up with an R+5 including Niagara Falls, and R+6 for the 200 K remainder of Erie so it's not that bad for the GOP.

I was thinking more in terms of a CA style mapping rather than a MI style map which many argue isn't that fair. As such partisan considersations were completely irrelevant and my primary concern was whether Niagara Falls had a better justification for being in an urban seat with Buffalo, then a bunch of rural Erie precincts.

[muon2]

In a "fair" map, would Niagara Falls and Buffalo be placed into a district together or would they prefer to keep the Buffalo seat entirely within Erie county?

Under my rules for a fair map (similar to MI) there should be a district entirely within Erie. That forces Buffalo into the district entirely within Erie so it couldn't link to Niagara Falls. I assume that anyone mapping them linked was doing so to make a stronger R district. As it is, I ended up with an R+5 including Niagara Falls, and R+6 for the 200 K remainder of Erie so it's not that bad for the GOP.

I was thinking more in terms of a CA style mapping rather than a MI style map which many argue isn't that fair. As such partisan considersations were completely irrelevant and my primary concern was whether Niagara Falls had a better justification for being in an urban seat with Buffalo, then a bunch of rural Erie precincts.

Actually the MI rules worked very well in the 1980 and 90 remaps. They were so well-regarded that MI codified them. However they didn't put in any tests for partisan bias, since the issue hadn't occurred. When a single party had control the lack of a cross check allowed the rules to be bent to partisan advantage.

Certainly one could make a CA style judgement that NF should be with Buffalo and then draw a map accordingly. It will strengthen the adjacent GOP districts and make the area less competitive. I think that those type of judgement calls can lead to problems as well as seen in AZ this year.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In a "fair" map, would Niagara Falls and Buffalo be placed into a district together or would they prefer to keep the Buffalo seat entirely within Erie county?

Under my rules for a fair map (similar to MI) there should be a district entirely within Erie. That forces Buffalo into the district entirely within Erie so it couldn't link to Niagara Falls. I assume that anyone mapping them linked was doing so to make a stronger R district. As it is, I ended up with an R+5 including Niagara Falls, and R+6 for the 200 K remainder of Erie so it's not that bad for the GOP.

I was thinking more in terms of a CA style mapping rather than a MI style map which many argue isn't that fair. As such partisan considersations were completely irrelevant and my primary concern was whether Niagara Falls had a better justification for being in an urban seat with Buffalo, then a bunch of rural Erie precincts.

Actually the MI rules worked very well in the 1980 and 90 remaps. They were so well-regarded that MI codified them. However they didn't put in any tests for partisan bias, since the issue hadn't occurred. When a single party had control the lack of a cross check allowed the rules to be bent to partisan advantage.

Certainly one could make a CA style judgement that NF should be with Buffalo and then draw a map accordingly. It will strengthen the adjacent GOP districts and make the area less competitive. I think that those type of judgement calls can lead to problems as well as seen in AZ this year.

So basically a gerrymander that doesn't look like a gerrymander. Even with the lipstick, the pig is still a pig. In my opinion, a fair map isn't what machine hack Repub and machine hack dem in a back room in Albany agree to scratch onto a map with their crayons. Therefore I don't think we can rely on bipartisan agreements to achieve the desired results. You can only do so much to leesh a legislature with standards, as MI proves and in FL is proving this time. Independent Non-Partisan Redistricting>Legislaitive Redistricting.

Whether it is your map or the one Torie did (if I recall it had a Buffalo seat then a Niagara Co. to PA seat surronding it), the question one has to ask is that "is it fair to put Niagara Falls, an urban area, into a district where it will be swamped by rural voters in a belt from Lake Ontario to PA, or place it into a district that would share similar urban rust belt issues, as it would with the city of Buffalo.

[minionofmidas]

And the answer would depend on how well either option works out for the Erie districts.

[Devils30]

Dems should just let the GOP draw the state map in exchange for a Dem congress map. Don't see how they can make the senate safe in a D+10 state.

[cinyc]

A federal judge is calling for a three judge panel to determine whether to appoint a special master to draw the congressional map (and reportedly, the legislative map, too).  The Second Circuit appointed the three judge panel today.  Time is supposedly of the essence now that a federal judge has forced New York to hold its federal primaries in June instead of September to comply with federal military absentee requirements.  I'm not sure how that applies to the legislative maps, which are already out and for which primaries need not be held until September.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Dems should just let the GOP draw the state map in exchange for a Dem congress map. Don't see how they can make the senate safe in a D+10 state.

And why on earth would the GOP agree to that?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I hope Cuomo stands firm against both parties. Doesn't he have every incentive to kick it to the courts if the lines aren't to his liking?

How hard is it to amend the state constitution in NY?

[cinyc]

I hope Cuomo stands firm against both parties. Doesn't he have every incentive to kick it to the courts if the lines aren't to his liking?

How hard is it to amend the state constitution in NY?

It is very hard to amend the NY state constitution.  Doing so requires passage by two consecutive legislatures and voter approval.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The voter approval is the easy part. It is getting the corrupt idiots in Albany to vote away their job security insurance.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Dems should just let the GOP draw the state map in exchange for a Dem congress map. Don't see how they can make the senate safe in a D+10 state.

And why on earth would the GOP agree to that?

Because self-preservation trumps party loyalty.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Miles]

Dems should just let the GOP draw the state map in exchange for a Dem congress map. Don't see how they can make the senate safe in a D+10 state.

And why on earth would the GOP agree to that?

Because self-preservation trumps party loyalty.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Exactly. The NY Republicans are like the LA Democrats.

[muon2]

In a "fair" map, would Niagara Falls and Buffalo be placed into a district together or would they prefer to keep the Buffalo seat entirely within Erie county?

Under my rules for a fair map (similar to MI) there should be a district entirely within Erie. That forces Buffalo into the district entirely within Erie so it couldn't link to Niagara Falls. I assume that anyone mapping them linked was doing so to make a stronger R district. As it is, I ended up with an R+5 including Niagara Falls, and R+6 for the 200 K remainder of Erie so it's not that bad for the GOP.

I was thinking more in terms of a CA style mapping rather than a MI style map which many argue isn't that fair. As such partisan considersations were completely irrelevant and my primary concern was whether Niagara Falls had a better justification for being in an urban seat with Buffalo, then a bunch of rural Erie precincts.

Actually the MI rules worked very well in the 1980 and 90 remaps. They were so well-regarded that MI codified them. However they didn't put in any tests for partisan bias, since the issue hadn't occurred. When a single party had control the lack of a cross check allowed the rules to be bent to partisan advantage.

Certainly one could make a CA style judgement that NF should be with Buffalo and then draw a map accordingly. It will strengthen the adjacent GOP districts and make the area less competitive. I think that those type of judgement calls can lead to problems as well as seen in AZ this year.

So basically a gerrymander that doesn't look like a gerrymander. Even with the lipstick, the pig is still a pig. In my opinion, a fair map isn't what machine hack Repub and machine hack dem in a back room in Albany agree to scratch onto a map with their crayons. Therefore I don't think we can rely on bipartisan agreements to achieve the desired results. You can only do so much to leesh a legislature with standards, as MI proves and in FL is proving this time. Independent Non-Partisan Redistricting>Legislaitive Redistricting.

Whether it is your map or the one Torie did (if I recall it had a Buffalo seat then a Niagara Co. to PA seat surronding it), the question one has to ask is that "is it fair to put Niagara Falls, an urban area, into a district where it will be swamped by rural voters in a belt from Lake Ontario to PA, or place it into a district that would share similar urban rust belt issues, as it would with the city of Buffalo.

The MI standards came from the special master (Bernie Apol) appointed in the 80s, so they weren't the work of a bipartisan agreement. The bipartisan agreement was to codify the standards in 1999, thinking that they would tie the hands of whichever party might control the map in 2001. They failed to anticipate how far their geographic standards could be twisted. I would have no problem handing the MI standards to an independent commission, since that is essentially how Apol did his work. I just think that independent commissions can benefit from precise standards that are set before they begin mapping.

Yes, Torie wrapped Niagara around Buffalo and I wrapped it around Rochester. I looked at the former and found a very nice combination of counties with minimal deviation, but I wasn't wild about the connector along the eastern edge of Erie. Since I could wrap Rochester with whole counties and minimal deviation I went that way, but either path is a valid solution.

Niagara county didn't even give 50% to Obama. There are plenty of other upstate counties that have a strong Dem city in otherwise GOP turf. If Niagara should be split to link NF because of its interest, why not similar connections splitting counties throughout upstate?

[Napoleon]

Dems should just let the GOP draw the state map in exchange for a Dem congress map. Don't see how they can make the senate safe in a D+10 state.

And why on earth would the GOP agree to that?

Because self-preservation trumps party loyalty.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Exactly. The NY Republicans are like the LA Democrats.

And every other party in any other state...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In a "fair" map, would Niagara Falls and Buffalo be placed into a district together or would they prefer to keep the Buffalo seat entirely within Erie county?

Under my rules for a fair map (similar to MI) there should be a district entirely within Erie. That forces Buffalo into the district entirely within Erie so it couldn't link to Niagara Falls. I assume that anyone mapping them linked was doing so to make a stronger R district. As it is, I ended up with an R+5 including Niagara Falls, and R+6 for the 200 K remainder of Erie so it's not that bad for the GOP.

I was thinking more in terms of a CA style mapping rather than a MI style map which many argue isn't that fair. As such partisan considersations were completely irrelevant and my primary concern was whether Niagara Falls had a better justification for being in an urban seat with Buffalo, then a bunch of rural Erie precincts.

Actually the MI rules worked very well in the 1980 and 90 remaps. They were so well-regarded that MI codified them. However they didn't put in any tests for partisan bias, since the issue hadn't occurred. When a single party had control the lack of a cross check allowed the rules to be bent to partisan advantage.

Certainly one could make a CA style judgement that NF should be with Buffalo and then draw a map accordingly. It will strengthen the adjacent GOP districts and make the area less competitive. I think that those type of judgement calls can lead to problems as well as seen in AZ this year.

So basically a gerrymander that doesn't look like a gerrymander. Even with the lipstick, the pig is still a pig. In my opinion, a fair map isn't what machine hack Repub and machine hack dem in a back room in Albany agree to scratch onto a map with their crayons. Therefore I don't think we can rely on bipartisan agreements to achieve the desired results. You can only do so much to leesh a legislature with standards, as MI proves and in FL is proving this time. Independent Non-Partisan Redistricting>Legislaitive Redistricting.

Whether it is your map or the one Torie did (if I recall it had a Buffalo seat then a Niagara Co. to PA seat surronding it), the question one has to ask is that "is it fair to put Niagara Falls, an urban area, into a district where it will be swamped by rural voters in a belt from Lake Ontario to PA, or place it into a district that would share similar urban rust belt issues, as it would with the city of Buffalo.

The MI standards came from the special master (Bernie Apol) appointed in the 80s, so they weren't the work of a bipartisan agreement. The bipartisan agreement was to codify the standards in 1999, thinking that they would tie the hands of whichever party might control the map in 2001. They failed to anticipate how far their geographic standards could be twisted. I would have no problem handing the MI standards to an independent commission, since that is essentially how Apol did his work. I just think that independent commissions can benefit from precise standards that are set before they begin mapping.

Yes, Torie wrapped Niagara around Buffalo and I wrapped it around Rochester. I looked at the former and found a very nice combination of counties with minimal deviation, but I wasn't wild about the connector along the eastern edge of Erie. Since I could wrap Rochester with whole counties and minimal deviation I went that way, but either path is a valid solution.

Niagara county didn't even give 50% to Obama. There are plenty of other upstate counties that have a strong Dem city in otherwise GOP turf. If Niagara should be split to link NF because of its interest, why not similar connections splitting counties throughout upstate?

I wasn't saying that it was the result of a bipartisan agreement. I said that it such relies on a bipartisan agreements to produce "fair" results, and even when such is the case, my point is I don't really trust say Joe Bruno and Sheldon Silver in 2001 to produce a reasonably "fair" result. Certainly a commission would have strict standards, that is the only way such a commission would work. My point is, they are more likely to do a better job than a legislative body.

I merely mentioned the differences in your maps in passing. Both are essentially the same with regards to this issue.

I am not really concerned with what gave Obama 50% versus 70% or whatever here. The issue regards a CA style remap and they don't consider such variables, unless I am mistaken.

The difference between Niagara and say Utica is this. Buffalo is considerably short of a district's population, as a city. Any such remap, as I am asking about, would start the district by including all of Buffalo, since there is no reason to split it other than political considerations of yore. Niagara Falls is right there, has many similarities and if avoiding county splits isn't that big of a concern when other more pressing issues occur, it stands to reason that putting it in with Buffalo would be a logical move should the local officials and community meetings reveal such a desire as being prevalent.

[Torie]

In a "fair" map, would Niagara Falls and Buffalo be placed into a district together or would they prefer to keep the Buffalo seat entirely within Erie county?

Under my rules for a fair map (similar to MI) there should be a district entirely within Erie. That forces Buffalo into the district entirely within Erie so it couldn't link to Niagara Falls. I assume that anyone mapping them linked was doing so to make a stronger R district. As it is, I ended up with an R+5 including Niagara Falls, and R+6 for the 200 K remainder of Erie so it's not that bad for the GOP.

I was thinking more in terms of a CA style mapping rather than a MI style map which many argue isn't that fair. As such partisan considersations were completely irrelevant and my primary concern was whether Niagara Falls had a better justification for being in an urban seat with Buffalo, then a bunch of rural Erie precincts.

Actually the MI rules worked very well in the 1980 and 90 remaps. They were so well-regarded that MI codified them. However they didn't put in any tests for partisan bias, since the issue hadn't occurred. When a single party had control the lack of a cross check allowed the rules to be bent to partisan advantage.

Certainly one could make a CA style judgement that NF should be with Buffalo and then draw a map accordingly. It will strengthen the adjacent GOP districts and make the area less competitive. I think that those type of judgement calls can lead to problems as well as seen in AZ this year.

So basically a gerrymander that doesn't look like a gerrymander. Even with the lipstick, the pig is still a pig. In my opinion, a fair map isn't what machine hack Repub and machine hack dem in a back room in Albany agree to scratch onto a map with their crayons. Therefore I don't think we can rely on bipartisan agreements to achieve the desired results. You can only do so much to leesh a legislature with standards, as MI proves and in FL is proving this time. Independent Non-Partisan Redistricting>Legislaitive Redistricting.

Whether it is your map or the one Torie did (if I recall it had a Buffalo seat then a Niagara Co. to PA seat surronding it), the question one has to ask is that "is it fair to put Niagara Falls, an urban area, into a district where it will be swamped by rural voters in a belt from Lake Ontario to PA, or place it into a district that would share similar urban rust belt issues, as it would with the city of Buffalo.

The MI standards came from the special master (Bernie Apol) appointed in the 80s, so they weren't the work of a bipartisan agreement. The bipartisan agreement was to codify the standards in 1999, thinking that they would tie the hands of whichever party might control the map in 2001. They failed to anticipate how far their geographic standards could be twisted. I would have no problem handing the MI standards to an independent commission, since that is essentially how Apol did his work. I just think that independent commissions can benefit from precise standards that are set before they begin mapping.

Yes, Torie wrapped Niagara around Buffalo and I wrapped it around Rochester. I looked at the former and found a very nice combination of counties with minimal deviation, but I wasn't wild about the connector along the eastern edge of Erie. Since I could wrap Rochester with whole counties and minimal deviation I went that way, but either path is a valid solution.

Niagara county didn't even give 50% to Obama. There are plenty of other upstate counties that have a strong Dem city in otherwise GOP turf. If Niagara should be split to link NF because of its interest, why not similar connections splitting counties throughout upstate?

I wasn't saying that it was the result of a bipartisan agreement. I said that it such relies on a bipartisan agreements to produce "fair" results, and even when such is the case, my point is I don't really trust say Joe Bruno and Sheldon Silver in 2001 to produce a reasonably "fair" result. Certainly a commission would have strict standards, that is the only way such a commission would work. My point is, they are more likely to do a better job than a legislative body.

I merely mentioned the differences in your maps in passing. Both are essentially the same with regards to this issue.

I am not really concerned with what gave Obama 50% versus 70% or whatever here. The issue regards a CA style remap and they don't consider such variables, unless I am mistaken.

The difference between Niagara and say Utica is this. Buffalo is considerably short of a district's population, as a city. Any such remap, as I am asking about, would start the district by including all of Buffalo, since there is no reason to split it other than political considerations of yore. Niagara Falls is right there, has many similarities and if avoiding county splits isn't that big of a concern when other more pressing issues occur, it stands to reason that putting it in with Buffalo would be a logical move should the local officials and community meetings reveal such a desire as being prevalent.

You have a point SNCY, and one can either focus on uniting inner metro areas or political jurisdictions, where they come into conflict, but I don't think Niagara Falls is in play as part of a Buffalo metro CD in any event. It's separated by an empty zone from the Buffalo metro area (empty Grand Island), and I don't the folks in Niagara Falls would want to be subsumed by a Buffalo CD in any event. If any town in Niagara County would be joined to a Buffalo metro CD, it would be North Towanada. I have depicted an all Erie County Buffalo metro CD, and one that pick up North Towanada in Niagara County as an alternative, to illustrate that in no event is the city of Niagara Falls in play really. They are closer in more densely populated places in Erie County nearer to Buffalo to pick up first.

[cinyc]

According to the New York Post, New York Democrats are reportedly feuding over the shape of Charlie Rangel's district.  One plan has the district sprawling from Harlem to Westchester, presumably picking up African-American majority parts of the North Central Bronx and at least Mount Vernon.  That could be drawn as a majority black VAP district.  Another plan has the district becoming a Hispanic majority district in Manhattan and the Bronx.

Republicans also might be refusing to name the Upstate Republican seat to axe.   Assembly leader Sheldon Silver thinks its possible that no agreement would be reached this week, leaving the courts to draw the map.

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

I wouldn't mind a court-drawn map, since it would probably threaten more upstate Republicans than downstate Democrats (the downstate Democratic seats Torie is salivating over are basically cases where the seat is currently in the 60s for Obama and would go to "only" high 50s or so. More legitimately Republican winnable seats downstate would also mean the possible end of Peter King.)

[muon2]

According to the New York Post, New York Democrats are reportedly feuding over the shape of Charlie Rangel's district.  One plan has the district sprawling from Harlem to Westchester, presumably picking up African-American majority parts of the North Central Bronx and at least Mount Vernon.  That could be drawn as a majority black VAP district.  Another plan has the district becoming a Hispanic majority district in Manhattan and the Bronx.

It'll be interesting to compare the result to this thread started a year and a half ago.

Politico posted a story this week about a problem for Rangel and Waters unrelated to their ethics charges. The demographic changes in their districts are replacing blacks with Hispanics, and neither live in majority-black districts anymore.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Back in January I looked at majority-minority districts in NYC and LA. I see the same changes reported by Politico, though both districts could be preserved at the expense of other areas.

In Manhattan, I found a district similar to Rangel's would be about 51% hispanic. To make that district black either requires cutting into Long Island, or going into the Bronx. I did the latter, and had to include Mount Vernon in Westchester as well to get a district that is 54% black (CD 15). It was easy to make two hispanic districts with over 60% (CD 7, 14) with the remaining area in those two boroughs less a small part to connect white districts from upstate to NYC. The yellow district at the bottom of the picture is a majority-asian district.

[Torie]

I wouldn't mind a court-drawn map, since it would probably threaten more upstate Republicans than downstate Democrats (the downstate Democratic seats Torie is salivating over are basically cases where the seat is currently in the 60s for Obama and would go to "only" high 50s or so. More legitimately Republican winnable seats downstate would also mean the possible end of Peter King.)

Where on earth are you getting your numbers BRTD?  My "fair and balanced" court drawn map had the numbers below, and it ain't Obama "high 50's" baby.  But be happy anyway BRTD. Think of all those green marginal seats that Atlasians can speculate about and game theory on for hours on end. It would just be fabulous BRTD. And you know it is good right to have marginal CD's don't you, from a public policy perspective right?  So the court will just be doing the Lord's work, assuming it draws my map, rather than some weird Lewis fantasy (although in the end I think I finally beat him down some in a protracted "war" of attrition).

[minionofmidas]

On Turner's district? Nah, the numbers beat me, not you.
On the LI carve? Nah. Nobody ever thought it implausible, no one but you will ever think it remotely reasonable.