Redistricting vicous cycle

[Beezer]

If one party has a huge landslide in the redistricting year, like what happened for Republicans in 2010, they would get control of redistricting for not only the U.S house, but state Senate and House races.

That means that, if they had an effective gerrymander, they could get a huge advantage in the State House and Senate.  This advantage would mean that they would be more likely to have control of redistricting next decade and again draw the districts favorably to them and so on...

Do we see this in practice, if only in a single state, or is this just a hypothetical scenario?

Isn't that how Dems were able to hold on to the South at the state and substate level for such a long time? Democratic governors and state legislatures ensured that burgeoning Republican support was gerrymandered in different ways which certainly hampered the GOP's chances of winning Southern congressional seats. Now the tables have been turned and even if demographic changes make that region more competitive again in presidential elections, it should take a long time before we see Democratic states legislatures in the South again.

[muon2]

My liberal fantasy is a reverse 2010 in 2020 (COMPLETE Democratic sweep). The Dems then use their redistricting power to impose a nonpartisan, math-based pro Democrat redistricting solution on every state which would be in place forever. Gerrymandering dies, problem solved.

That is what would really happen.

That's why I said "my liberal fantasy". Nate Silver types would lead the charge, along with the Dems who love bipartisanship. The Dems who were burned by unfairness in our electorate (2000 presidential election, two decades of Republican gerrymandering) force everyone else to not go partisan, with aid from Republicans who would benefit from the nonpartisan solution. (and finally, DC would pick up a seat in Congress, because it's MY liberal fantasy, so why not xD)

Unfortunately the opportunity was there in IL as the Dem map of 2000 plus the Gov win in 2010 allowed the Dems to draw a map to maintain their hold for the next decade. The Governor's task force and liberal activist groups in Chicago clamored for a neutral redistricting amendment but the majority party in the legislature would not entertain it. Power trumped ideology when push came to shove.

[freepcrusher]

my opinion is that the best way to take control of North Carolina is by a coup of sorts. It may sound extreme but when push comes to shove it may be necessary.

[Sol]

It also helps that party if the other party has moderate heroes like Andrew Cuomo who go out of their way to help that party gerrymander so that they can burnish their bipartisan credentials. It appears that North Carolina has a Democratic governor who also didn't do much to stop these. That North Carolina map looks as bad as a 27-0 NY Democratic map.

The NC governor can't veto redistricting maps.

[Blackacre]

My liberal fantasy is a reverse 2010 in 2020 (COMPLETE Democratic sweep). The Dems then use their redistricting power to impose a nonpartisan, math-based pro Democrat redistricting solution on every state which would be in place forever. Gerrymandering dies, problem solved.

That is what would really happen.

That's why I said "my liberal fantasy". Nate Silver types would lead the charge, along with the Dems who love bipartisanship. The Dems who were burned by unfairness in our electorate (2000 presidential election, two decades of Republican gerrymandering) force everyone else to not go partisan, with aid from Republicans who would benefit from the nonpartisan solution. (and finally, DC would pick up a seat in Congress, because it's MY liberal fantasy, so why not xD)

Unfortunately the opportunity was there in IL as the Dem map of 2000 plus the Gov win in 2010 allowed the Dems to draw a map to maintain their hold for the next decade. The Governor's task force and liberal activist groups in Chicago clamored for a neutral redistricting amendment but the majority party in the legislature would not entertain it. Power trumped ideology when push came to shove.

The thing is that Gerrymandering is an unnecessary evil (like the current fillibuster) and must be stopped on a national level. There has to be a way to undo it. When there's a will, there's a way...

[muon2]

My liberal fantasy is a reverse 2010 in 2020 (COMPLETE Democratic sweep). The Dems then use their redistricting power to impose a nonpartisan, math-based pro Democrat redistricting solution on every state which would be in place forever. Gerrymandering dies, problem solved.

That is what would really happen.

That's why I said "my liberal fantasy". Nate Silver types would lead the charge, along with the Dems who love bipartisanship. The Dems who were burned by unfairness in our electorate (2000 presidential election, two decades of Republican gerrymandering) force everyone else to not go partisan, with aid from Republicans who would benefit from the nonpartisan solution. (and finally, DC would pick up a seat in Congress, because it's MY liberal fantasy, so why not xD)

Unfortunately the opportunity was there in IL as the Dem map of 2000 plus the Gov win in 2010 allowed the Dems to draw a map to maintain their hold for the next decade. The Governor's task force and liberal activist groups in Chicago clamored for a neutral redistricting amendment but the majority party in the legislature would not entertain it. Power trumped ideology when push came to shove.

The thing is that Gerrymandering is an unnecessary evil (like the current fillibuster) and must be stopped on a national level. There has to be a way to undo it. When there's a will, there's a way...

Congress has the power to define the districts for its members. Single member districts were decreed as an act of Congress as far back as 1842. A national program to define districts would be within that same scope of power. Changes to state legislative redistricting would be up to the 50 states.

[Nichlemn]

A redistricting vicous circle is hampered by the fact that (with the exception of NC), governors have a veto power over redistricting, and governors aren't subject to gerrymandering.

[Sol]

A redistricting vicous circle is hampered by the fact that (with the exception of NC), governors have a veto power over redistricting, and governors aren't subject to gerrymandering.

Not much consolation there.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This actually would be a good reason for Dems to hope the GOP takes back the White House in 2016, since 2018 would be the key political cycle. After 10 years of Democratic rule, things could go pretty bad once again.

[SPC]

This actually would be a good reason for Dems to hope the GOP takes back the White House in 2016, since 2018 would be the key political cycle. After 10 years of Democratic rule, things could go pretty bad once again.

If not, could we see the opposite of 1952-1992, where one party dominates the Presidency while the other party dominates Congress?

[Benj]

This actually would be a good reason for Dems to hope the GOP takes back the White House in 2016, since 2018 would be the key political cycle. After 10 years of Democratic rule, things could go pretty bad once again.

2020 is the key cycle, not 2018. Redistricting occurs in years ending in '1' (2001, 2011, 2021, etc.), after the Census results for the preceding year are released.

[Skill and Chance]

This actually would be a good reason for Dems to hope the GOP takes back the White House in 2016, since 2018 would be the key political cycle. After 10 years of Democratic rule, things could go pretty bad once again.

2020 is the key cycle, not 2018. Redistricting occurs in years ending in '1' (2001, 2011, 2021, etc.), after the Census results for the preceding year are released.

But the governors that will sit in 2021 are elected in 2018 in the vast majority of states.  The good news for Democrats regardless of the presidential outcome is that there are a ton of Republican incumbents from 2010 that will be term-limited that year (if they don't lose in 2014).

The ideal situation for Democrats is defeating an unpopular 1 term Republican in 2020 so they also get the benefit of the state legislatures in 2020.  The ideal Republican situation is probably the opposite.  An incumbent being reelected would be a wash because the opposition would likely win the 2018 midterm.