Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 10:46:45 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderator: muon2)
| | |-+  US House Redistricting: South Carolina
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Print
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: South Carolina  (Read 9344 times)
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: June 15, 2011, 02:28:22 pm »
Ignore

That's right, Democrats took about 3/7th of the SC vote, so they should by right get about 3/7th of seats. Right? Tongue

A.  Dems didn't get 3/7th of the vote.
Sure did. More than that. (Okay, so I'm specifically talking of Barack Obama in 2008. Not going to look up the congressional total for each and every year. Especially seeing as the state had 1.5 non-joke contests in both 2008 and 2010.)
Quote
B. It doesn't work that way
Of course not. But you know what it was in reference to (though I suppose you weren't being serious in using that as a defence of your own NY gerrymander either.)

1) I see the VRA is now being reintrepreted to protect White liberals. In case you have forgotten, White liberals have never been subjected to the types of acts that the VRA was suppose to remedy.

2)  This presumes a closed primary system in which White voters whom typical vote Republican don't nominate the White Democrat in the primary.
Lolwut?

For your reading comprehension:
Just for hilarity's sake

Obviously this map does not conform to the VRA in any way - if anything, it might be conceivable if the VRA were overturned and Dems had control of redistricting (though they'd make the southern seats more erose to shore them up a bit). And how likely is that, exactly?
The part about
Quote
the point here is: the uglyness of the above two black democratic seats maps is due only to their having to reach an unnaturally high threshold of Black population, thanks to the way Republicans on the SC have interpreted the VRA. Two Black Democratic (defining a white man whose primary and general electorate is Black-dominated as a Black Democrat)
refers to a map not posted - a cleaner-looking version of the two black seats map. These would still be Black enough to elect what I called Black Democrats (though not Bobby Rush or Cynthia McKinney, obviously. Oh, and on rereading, my wording was a bit unclear: I meant to include Steve Cohen or even John Barrow with the Black Democrats because they have much the same electoral coalition as Black Democrats. Basically, I was saying the districts would elect a Sanford Bishop / GK Butterfield / Artur Davis type or possibly a John Barrow type.). They wouldn't be over 50% Black VAP is all. The 50% thingy in case law creeps in due to the need to demonstrate to a court that SC (arguably; according to current case law) must draw the two seats. If South Carolina had a commission for these things that was forced to interpret the VRA in good faith, it would draw two such seats.

The gist of the lawsuit, he said, would be to encourage the U.S. Justice Department to approve a S.C. plan that moves African-American voters out of majority-black districts to other districts, giving them more sway over who is elected.
LOL, what a bunch of hacks! They say the opposite in so many other states, and for that matter, in the same state for the Congressional map.
So they're saying Blacks are overpacked - seems to me like that's exactly what they're saying about the Congressional map in the same state. (Guilty as charged on being a bunch of hacks and saying the opposite in some other states, of course!)



And now, for comic relief again. An attempt at a "colorblind" but otherwise "fair" map of South Carolina - something a British boundary commission might have come up with (except with very little leeway for deviation, as common in US congressional districts. Maximum deviation here is 177). And like a British boundary commission's map, this is a first draft - details would be likely to change after a hearing with people on the ground.



Charleston (blue) Charleston, Berkeley and Dorchester Counties - the three counties to be partly in the Charleston built-up area - are barely too large for one constituency. Using a uniform correction, McCain barely edged Obama here. However, as it's almost exactly made from three counties, we can just use the actual figures, and the lead was 1.odd% in real life. Guess the gap between absentee and in-person votes was smaller in Charleston than elsewhere in the state.

South Carolina South West (green) takes in the remainder of the low country and some adjoining country to the north. Uniform correction makes this McCain by 2.3 or so.

Pee Dee (purple) Based on Horry, with its (blacker and less Republican) hinterland. McCain by 5 or so.

Columbia (red) Richland and Lexington are too small for one district, but not by much. Obama by 3 or so.

Rock Hill & South Carolina North East (yellow) Bit unfortunate design, but not much choice (see also next para.) McCain by 4 or so.

Spartanburg & Greenville South (cyan) Doesn't actually take in any part of Greenville proper (if precinct names can be trusted). Still, had to split the Greenville metro. The alternatives like drawing a donut around Greenville County or a donut around just the urban cores of Greenville and Spartanburg or including Anderson in the green district and anything at all removed from the Savannah in other districts are all worse. Very safe Republican (almost 60% McCain).

Greenville North & Anderson (grey) Even safer - 64.odd% McCain.

Now... the issue with this map (which I drew without looking at the race or election figures) is... every seat is at least 56% White. That's because the semi-solid belt of rural Black settlement is split between four constituencies. Which obviously doesn't fly if race is any consideration at all - nvm the only specially legally protected consideration as in the US right now.
Oh, and instead of a 5-2 map, I came out with more of a 3-0-4 map. Lol.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Insula Dei
belgiansocialist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4233
Belgium


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: June 15, 2011, 02:30:30 pm »
Ignore

And, I worked it out for myself:



SC as a whole, bear in mind that the underlying assumption is that the app has a structural GOP bias of about 2,5% , as someone said in this very thread. It's entirely possible that I'm mistaken, in whcih case this map won't be too sweet for the Dems.

CD1: McCain 50,5 - Obama 48,0 TOSS-UP
CD2: McCain 43,7 - Obama 55,3 LEAN/SOLID Dem
CD3: McCain 70,6 - Obama 27,7 SOLID Rep
CD4: McCain 67,9 - Obama 30,8 SOLID Rep
CD5: McCain 48,8 - Obama 50,0 T0SS-UP/ LEAN Dem
CD6: McCain 50,3 - Obama 48,6 TOSS-UP
CD7: McCain 61,1 - Obama 37,6 SOLID GOP

Again, if there should turn out to be no structural GOP-advantage due to something with absentee ballots/abstention/..., this map wouldn't be too hot. That said, i have to say that what started as an attempt at a Dem Gerrymander, actually finished as quite a fair map. In a good year the Dems can win 4 seats, in a bad year none at all.

Oh, and a zoom-in of the North Chareston area, which is quite badly mangled, I'm afraid.


And, while the map may look horrible, all seats are geographicaly consistent; Anyone could go anywhere in their district without having to leave it.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2011, 02:42:19 pm by belgiansocialist »Logged

only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: June 15, 2011, 02:33:06 pm »
Ignore

SC as a whole, bear in mind that the underlying assumption is that the app has a structural GOP bias of about 2,5% , as someone said in this very thread. It's entirely possible that I'm mistaken.
You can easily test that claim with the app (just look at the blank map, click on unassigned and let it show you the election stats). I did. Smiley
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Smash255
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14394


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: June 15, 2011, 07:27:06 pm »
Ignore

I'm sick of this disgraceful, race based gerrymandering.  That section of the VRA must be stricken.  It's archaic.   The notion that minorities must have their own "majority" seats is inherently biased, racist and segregationist

You do realize the reasons those laws exist is because in the districts were previously drawn to race bait gerrymander and dilute minority votes as much as possible right??

Think of how Austin is being split into five districts to limit the voting power of Austin liberals as much as possible, well that is exactly how it use to be with areas that had large minority populations.  Split them up as much as possible to dilute any possible voting power they have.
Logged

timothyinMD
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 441


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: June 16, 2011, 05:42:34 pm »
Ignore

2010 Democrat House candidates got 40.09%

537,323 out of 1,340,189 = 40.09%

http://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/19077/40477/en/summary.html

I assumed you referred to the congressional number. If you're talking about '08 Obama, yes he got 44.9% or whatever.    Under that logic, 36% of the Massachusetts vote went to McCain.  Where are our 3 house seats from Massachusetts?
« Last Edit: June 16, 2011, 05:49:49 pm by timothyinMD »Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9223
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -5.22

View Profile
« Reply #55 on: June 16, 2011, 05:50:49 pm »
Ignore

2010 Democrat House candidates got 40.09%

537,323 out of 1,340,189 = 40.09%

http://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/19077/40477/en/summary.html

I assumed you referred to the congressional number. If you're talking about '08 Obama, yes he got 44.9% or whatever.    Under that logic, 36% of the Massachusetts vote went to McCain.  Where are our 3 house seats from Massachusetts?

Logged

Bob Findley: "You're a real dyed-in-the-wool son-of-a-bitch. Anyone ever told you that?"
Steve Everett: "Just close friends and family,"

Clint Eastwood's "True Crime", 1999.
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: June 18, 2011, 05:48:28 am »
Ignore

Here's a version of the last map where race was taken into account as one of many factors. Max deviation 366. Purple district is majority Black, plurality Black VAP. Getting it to majority Black VAP requires really ugly stuff on the eastern edge and/or entering the Charleston or Columbia built-up areas.



Politically speaking it's 4-1-2, with the Charleston (& points west) marginally Republican and the Columbia seat marginally Democratic.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2011, 05:50:46 am by Jakob Bronsky »Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: June 18, 2011, 06:01:49 am »
Ignore

And because I was unhappy with Kershaw County in that one...



Aiken town has been racially split. Still doesn't take purple over 50% Black VAP. Maximum Deviation has been gotten down to 97, though.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28529
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #58 on: June 18, 2011, 10:30:55 am »
Ignore

As much as I admire what you've done to Joe Wilson, neither plan would never pass the General assembly because of that.
Logged

My ballot:
Haley(R) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D/Working Families) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
TBD: Lex 1 School Board
Yes: Am. 1 (allow charity raffles)
No: Am. 2 (end election of the Adj. General)
No: Local Sales Tax
Yes: Temp Beer/Wine Permits
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28529
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #59 on: June 24, 2011, 07:05:17 pm »
Ignore

Congressional redistricting debate splinters Senate

(link - The State)

Quote from: John O' Connor
Regional interests dominated Senate debate Thursday, with lawmakers working to make sure that if any ox was gored, it was not from their county.

That meant Greenville County lawmakers were pitted against those from Spartanburg County over how to split their population in a redrawn 4th District, now represented by Republican U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy.

Lawmakers from Sumter and Darlington counties also challenged the idea that Horry County was part of the Pee Dee region and, therefore, should be included in a new 7th Congressional District.

As mentioned later in the article, the GOP will do its best to find a plan to agree to so as to avoid having a three-judge Federal panel draw the lines and possibly giving the Democrats the chance to elect a second Representative.

The Senate will resume debate on redistricting on Monday.
Logged

My ballot:
Haley(R) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D/Working Families) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
TBD: Lex 1 School Board
Yes: Am. 1 (allow charity raffles)
No: Am. 2 (end election of the Adj. General)
No: Local Sales Tax
Yes: Temp Beer/Wine Permits
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8783


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: June 27, 2011, 08:47:40 am »

Congressional redistricting debate splinters Senate

(link - The State)

Quote from: John O' Connor
Regional interests dominated Senate debate Thursday, with lawmakers working to make sure that if any ox was gored, it was not from their county.

That meant Greenville County lawmakers were pitted against those from Spartanburg County over how to split their population in a redrawn 4th District, now represented by Republican U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy.

Lawmakers from Sumter and Darlington counties also challenged the idea that Horry County was part of the Pee Dee region and, therefore, should be included in a new 7th Congressional District.

As mentioned later in the article, the GOP will do its best to find a plan to agree to so as to avoid having a three-judge Federal panel draw the lines and possibly giving the Democrats the chance to elect a second Representative.

The Senate will resume debate on redistricting on Monday.

I wonder if part of the public fight stems from a private recognition that any 6-1 plan will be vulnerable to a challenge. Black statewide VAP is 26.3%, which is equivalent to 1.84 congressional districts. The standard is "rough proportionality", but there's no clear guidance as to whether 1 district is roughly proportional to 1.84. Perhaps the lawyers internally are suggesting that it would be unlikely to be viewed that way.

It would be bad politically to have the SC GOP appear to give away their new seat to the Dems. If there is no agreement and federal judges give that seat away, then perhaps the political blame is on the judges, not the SC Senate.
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28529
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #61 on: June 27, 2011, 05:01:14 pm »
Ignore

I wonder if part of the public fight stems from a private recognition that any 6-1 plan will be vulnerable to a challenge. Black statewide VAP is 26.3%, which is equivalent to 1.84 congressional districts. The standard is "rough proportionality", but there's no clear guidance as to whether 1 district is roughly proportional to 1.84. Perhaps the lawyers internally are suggesting that it would be unlikely to be viewed that way.

It would be bad politically to have the SC GOP appear to give away their new seat to the Dems. If there is no agreement and federal judges give that seat away, then perhaps the political blame is on the judges, not the SC Senate.

Doubtful.  Clyburn had already given the SC GOP the political cover they needed to pass a 6-1 plan which would as a side effect ensure he has a super-safe district to run in for the next decade.  To the degree that politics rather than regional pride is involved, it is more likely due to internal GOP differences than VRA worries.  The upstate is a bastion of social conservatives while the midlands and coast is more fiscal conservative/libertarian in nature. If the new 7th district contains Horry County then it will be significantly less socially conservative than it would be if it did not.  In other words, without Horry the 7th would be likely to elect someone like DeMint and with Horry it would be likely to elect someone like Graham.
Logged

My ballot:
Haley(R) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D/Working Families) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
TBD: Lex 1 School Board
Yes: Am. 1 (allow charity raffles)
No: Am. 2 (end election of the Adj. General)
No: Local Sales Tax
Yes: Temp Beer/Wine Permits
timothyinMD
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 441


View Profile
« Reply #62 on: June 27, 2011, 07:20:45 pm »
Ignore

I'm pretty sure the Constitution says nothing of dividing congressional districts according to race.  Enough said.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8783


View Profile
« Reply #63 on: June 27, 2011, 09:12:38 pm »

I'm pretty sure the Constitution says nothing of dividing congressional districts according to race.  Enough said.

The 15th Amendment to the Constitution bars voting discrimination on account of race and gives Congress the power to enact laws to enforce the amendment. It gave Congress broad power as part of the Reconstruction Acts. In some ways the Reconstruction Amendments were among the broadest grants of power to Congress within the Constitution.

Drawing districts very much affects the power of an individual's vote; the art of gerrymandering is to minimize the potency of your opponents' votes while maximizing your sides' potency at the ballot. So discrimination in redistricting is akin to discrimination in voting. In 1965 the Voting Rights Act became law, and was promptly challenged in court. SCOTUS ruled that the VRA was a proper exercise of the power granted by the 15th Amendment.

So, I would conclude that the Constitution specifically granted Congress the power to require race as a factor in drawing districts.
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8783


View Profile
« Reply #64 on: June 27, 2011, 09:21:50 pm »

I drew a plan that might result if the process is handled by a special master assigned by the court should there be no agreement. I take as assumptions that the court directs that 2 districts be drawn with majority black VAP, and that the cores of the 5 white-majority districts be maintained when possible. In this map all districts are within 100 of the ideal population and CD 6 and 7 are 50.2% and 50.1% black VAP respectively.

Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
BigSkyBob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2269
View Profile
« Reply #65 on: June 27, 2011, 11:11:16 pm »
Ignore

Congressional redistricting debate splinters Senate

(link - The State)

Quote from: John O' Connor
Regional interests dominated Senate debate Thursday, with lawmakers working to make sure that if any ox was gored, it was not from their county.

That meant Greenville County lawmakers were pitted against those from Spartanburg County over how to split their population in a redrawn 4th District, now represented by Republican U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy.

Lawmakers from Sumter and Darlington counties also challenged the idea that Horry County was part of the Pee Dee region and, therefore, should be included in a new 7th Congressional District.

As mentioned later in the article, the GOP will do its best to find a plan to agree to so as to avoid having a three-judge Federal panel draw the lines and possibly giving the Democrats the chance to elect a second Representative.

The Senate will resume debate on redistricting on Monday.

I wonder if part of the public fight stems from a private recognition that any 6-1 plan will be vulnerable to a challenge. Black statewide VAP is 26.3%, which is equivalent to 1.84 congressional districts. The standard is "rough proportionality", but there's no clear guidance as to whether 1 district is roughly proportional to 1.84. Perhaps the lawyers internally are suggesting that it would be unlikely to be viewed that way.


Substitute "Hispanic" for "Black," and "California" for "South Carolina" and you have about 20 "Hispanic" VRA districts. Good Luck drawing that many seats. The reality is that Hispanics are fairly dispersed in California, and Blacks are fairly dispersed in the South, including South Carolina.

Quote
It would be bad politically to have the SC GOP appear to give away their new seat to the Dems. If there is no agreement and federal judges give that seat away, then perhaps the political blame is on the judges, not the SC Senate.
Logged

The real scandal in Washington is not the bribery, corruption, or sex. It is how poorly we are governed.
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8783


View Profile
« Reply #66 on: June 27, 2011, 11:41:03 pm »

Congressional redistricting debate splinters Senate

(link - The State)

Quote from: John O' Connor
Regional interests dominated Senate debate Thursday, with lawmakers working to make sure that if any ox was gored, it was not from their county.

That meant Greenville County lawmakers were pitted against those from Spartanburg County over how to split their population in a redrawn 4th District, now represented by Republican U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy.

Lawmakers from Sumter and Darlington counties also challenged the idea that Horry County was part of the Pee Dee region and, therefore, should be included in a new 7th Congressional District.

As mentioned later in the article, the GOP will do its best to find a plan to agree to so as to avoid having a three-judge Federal panel draw the lines and possibly giving the Democrats the chance to elect a second Representative.

The Senate will resume debate on redistricting on Monday.

I wonder if part of the public fight stems from a private recognition that any 6-1 plan will be vulnerable to a challenge. Black statewide VAP is 26.3%, which is equivalent to 1.84 congressional districts. The standard is "rough proportionality", but there's no clear guidance as to whether 1 district is roughly proportional to 1.84. Perhaps the lawyers internally are suggesting that it would be unlikely to be viewed that way.


Substitute "Hispanic" for "Black," and "California" for "South Carolina" and you have about 20 "Hispanic" VRA districts. Good Luck drawing that many seats. The reality is that Hispanics are fairly dispersed in California, and Blacks are fairly dispersed in the South, including South Carolina.

Strict proportionality would provide 17.54 districts in CA based on 33.1% Hispanic VAP. Last year I posted a CA map that met that standard with 18 Hispanic-majority districts. However, as has been noted in the IL thread, a 50% VAP generally will not be sufficient for Hispanics to elect a candidate of choice. If one uses a 60% standard, then one would roughly expect 5/6 the number of districts, or 14.6 districts out of 53. That same map has 15 districts meeting that threshold.

I would conclude that the minority populations are not so dispersed as to prevent reasonable districts from being drawn.
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: June 28, 2011, 05:29:25 am »
Ignore

Ooh, pretty good. That's a map you could take the state to court with.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8783


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: June 28, 2011, 09:53:07 am »

Ooh, pretty good. That's a map you could take the state to court with.

Smiley
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28529
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #69 on: June 29, 2011, 05:46:45 pm »
Ignore

Senate passes surprise plan
Beaufort would anchor new congressional district

The State

Quote from: Gina Smith
The odds increased Tuesday that the federal government will draw South Carolina’s congressional districts, including the state’s new 7th District.

A coalition of rebel Republicans and minority party Democrats in the state Senate approved a surprise redistricting plan Tuesday that creates a new 7th District that is centered in Beaufort County, running from Williamsburg to Jasper counties. Under the plan, Charleston and Horry counties would remain in the 1st District.

The S.C. House has approved a plan to put the new 7th District in the northeastern corner of the state, including Horry and the Pee Dee region. Leaders of the GOP-controlled Senate had hoped to approve the same plan.

Logged

My ballot:
Haley(R) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D/Working Families) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
TBD: Lex 1 School Board
Yes: Am. 1 (allow charity raffles)
No: Am. 2 (end election of the Adj. General)
No: Local Sales Tax
Yes: Temp Beer/Wine Permits
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8783


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: June 29, 2011, 06:58:48 pm »

Senate passes surprise plan
Beaufort would anchor new congressional district

The State

Quote from: Gina Smith
The odds increased Tuesday that the federal government will draw South Carolina’s congressional districts, including the state’s new 7th District.

A coalition of rebel Republicans and minority party Democrats in the state Senate approved a surprise redistricting plan Tuesday that creates a new 7th District that is centered in Beaufort County, running from Williamsburg to Jasper counties. Under the plan, Charleston and Horry counties would remain in the 1st District.

The S.C. House has approved a plan to put the new 7th District in the northeastern corner of the state, including Horry and the Pee Dee region. Leaders of the GOP-controlled Senate had hoped to approve the same plan.



It's so hard to imagine these goings on in SC. It is inconceivable to think that a split among Dems in IL would result in a rogue group banding with the GOP to pass an alternate plan.

Then again, maybe I should be prepared to submit my credentials to the federal court in SC. Wink
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
krazen1211
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5931


View Profile
« Reply #71 on: June 29, 2011, 07:09:33 pm »
Ignore

Senate passes surprise plan
Beaufort would anchor new congressional district

The State

Quote from: Gina Smith
The odds increased Tuesday that the federal government will draw South Carolina’s congressional districts, including the state’s new 7th District.

A coalition of rebel Republicans and minority party Democrats in the state Senate approved a surprise redistricting plan Tuesday that creates a new 7th District that is centered in Beaufort County, running from Williamsburg to Jasper counties. Under the plan, Charleston and Horry counties would remain in the 1st District.

The S.C. House has approved a plan to put the new 7th District in the northeastern corner of the state, including Horry and the Pee Dee region. Leaders of the GOP-controlled Senate had hoped to approve the same plan.



It's so hard to imagine these goings on in SC. It is inconceivable to think that a split among Dems in IL would result in a rogue group banding with the GOP to pass an alternate plan.

Then again, maybe I should be prepared to submit my credentials to the federal court in SC. Wink

We saw the same in Louisiana. Regional morons; in the end they will fall in line.
Logged
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28529
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #72 on: June 29, 2011, 07:42:03 pm »
Ignore

It's so hard to imagine these goings on in SC. It is inconceivable to think that a split among Dems in IL would result in a rogue group banding with the GOP to pass an alternate plan.

Then again, maybe I should be prepared to submit my credentials to the federal court in SC. Wink

I can believe it.  A couple decades we had a similar squabble over reapportioning the General Assembly. The then minority Republicans and Black Democrats worked together to pass a plans that created more GOP districts and more Black majority districts. It worked, but with a couple of white Democrats who switched parties, the Republicans took control of the Assembly and have never relinquished it since. Ooops!

I don't think any three-judge panel plan is likely to create two safe Democratic seats, maybe one safe Dem and one lean Dem seat, but as I posted earlier, for most Republicans, this is about which Republican will be elected from the 7th district, especially since the area the 7th covers will determine who can run and what type of Republican will be likely to win. I haven't checked, but I'm willing to bet that some Republican State Senator from Beaufort County is hoping to run for Congress in 2012.
Logged

My ballot:
Haley(R) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D/Working Families) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
TBD: Lex 1 School Board
Yes: Am. 1 (allow charity raffles)
No: Am. 2 (end election of the Adj. General)
No: Local Sales Tax
Yes: Temp Beer/Wine Permits
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8783


View Profile
« Reply #73 on: June 29, 2011, 07:47:43 pm »

It's so hard to imagine these goings on in SC. It is inconceivable to think that a split among Dems in IL would result in a rogue group banding with the GOP to pass an alternate plan.

Then again, maybe I should be prepared to submit my credentials to the federal court in SC. Wink

I can believe it.  A couple decades we had a similar squabble over reapportioning the General Assembly. The then minority Republicans and Black Democrats worked together to pass a plans that created more GOP districts and more Black majority districts. It worked, but with a couple of white Democrats who switched parties, the Republicans took control of the Assembly and have never relinquished it since. Ooops!

I don't think any three-judge panel plan is likely to create two safe Democratic seats, maybe one safe Dem and one lean Dem seat, but as I posted earlier, for most Republicans, this is about which Republican will be elected from the 7th district, especially since the area the 7th covers will determine who can run and what type of Republican will be likely to win. I haven't checked, but I'm willing to bet that some Republican State Senator from Beaufort County is hoping to run for Congress in 2012.

It still strikes me as quite dangerous, since I don't think the state GOP could seriously rule out a judicial requirement to create two black-majority districts. This could be a costly gamble at the national level.
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28529
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #74 on: June 29, 2011, 08:03:43 pm »
Ignore

The way population trends are going right now, a plan with two minority-barely majority districts could end up being a 7-0 GOP plan by the end of the decade.  Why do you think Clyburn hasn't been pushing for minority majority districts?
Logged

My ballot:
Haley(R) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D/Working Families) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
TBD: Lex 1 School Board
Yes: Am. 1 (allow charity raffles)
No: Am. 2 (end election of the Adj. General)
No: Local Sales Tax
Yes: Temp Beer/Wine Permits
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines