Draw the Congressional Districts of the Alternate States!

[Antonio the Sixth]

This thread is based on my Alternate US States project. I'm doing my best to create a scenario as complete as possible on the political situation of each State, but I don't have enough time and will to try and draw all the Congressional maps.

Basically, anyone here who's interested in redistricting can submit maps based on each State in this scenario - taking into account that State's territory, its number of representatives under the 2010 apportionment, and the political situation affecting redistricting choice, ie control of the governorship and legislature (you'll find all this data on the main thread).

Anyone interested (besides Jerry)?

[Sol]

I can do NC. They lose a district, no?

[Antonio the Sixth]

I can do NC. They lose a district, no?

Nah, NC (as most of the South) is left untouched under my map.

[OAM]

I'll probably have a go or two, especially when we get to IL.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Just to make it simpler, here's what you need to know about each State for redistricting:

State	# CDs (2010)	Governor	Legislature	Gerrymander
New England	5	Dem	Dem	Unlikely
Massachusetts	11	Dem	Dem	Likely
New York	18 or 19	Dem	Dem	Possible
Adirondack	9	Rep	Rep	Likely
Pennsylvania	11	Dem	Rep or Split	Unlikely
Allegheny	7	Rep	Rep	Very likely
Maryland	10	Dem	Dem	Very likely
North Florida	11	Rep	Rep	Very likely
South Florida	16	Dem	Rep	Unlikely
Texas	12	Rep	Rep	Likely
Rio Grande	11	Rep	Dem	Unlikely
Jefferson	12 or 13	Rep	Rep	Likely

[politicallefty]

I would expect very aggressive gerrymanders in Massachusetts and Maryland. With DC as part of MD, I don't Democrats would leave a single seat for Republicans. I wonder how aggressive they would be in your alternative NY. Democrats could easily take every seat.

I went ahead and tried the new Pennsylvania. With a breakdown like that, neither party would be getting a gerrymander through. More than likely, there'd be a stalemate and the map would go to the courts. So, here's my proposal:



I generally tried to keep counties and municipalities together, avoiding unnecessary splits for the most part. Each district tries to keep a basic core area except PA-11, which is pretty much the leftovers that doesn't really go anywhere. (FWIW, these districts could easily have names, as many other countries do.)

PA-01: (Obama 77.1%-22.1%, Dem 78.0%-22.0%) I admit I don't know much about the intricacies of Philadelphia, but I used Broad St as the dividing line between the two main districts in the city. This district takes in the areas east of it and moves up in the Northeast Philly. In terms of VAP, it is majority-minority with a 46.6% white plurality. Safe D
PA-02: (Obama 91.9%-7.7%, Dem 90.4%-9.6%) This district takes in all of Philadelphia west of Broad St. It has a 60.5% VAP black majority. Safe D
PA-03: (Obama 53.7%-45.2%, Dem 52.5%-47.5%) This is the Bucks County district (with some of Philly added for population). It should be a highly competitive district that would depend a lot on candidate quality and the national environment. To avoid too much speculation: Toss-Up
PA-04: (Obama 60.4%-38.8%, Dem 57.1%-42.9% This is the Montgomery County district (picking up the small remainder of Philadelphia). It may have once been a Republican stronghold, but that is certainly no longer the case in national politics. If Democrats lose this district, they are facing catastrophe. Safe D
PA-05: (Obama 59.0%-40.1%, Dem 55.6%-44.4%) This is the Delaware County district (about 80% of the district, with the remainder from Chester County). Joe Sestak could easily return to Congress in this district, which would be even friendly than his old district. Despite the fact that this district may have more registered Republicans than Democrats: Safe D (maybe Likely D)
PA-06: (Obama 54.2%-44.6%, GOP 50.0%-50.0%) This district spans all of Berks County, with good portions of Chester and MontCo (roughly 60-25-15). Despite voting decisively for Obama in 2008 and having an almost infinitesimal 269-vote Republican average edge, this has been a very tough district for Democrats. It may be very competitive, but I don't think it's a toss-up. Lean R (maybe even Likely R)
PA-07: (McCain 52.7%-46.4%, GOP 59.6%-40.4%) This is the Lancaster County district (about 75%, with the remaining 25% from Chester County). For some reason, Obama ran quite in this district in 2008. That is most definitely an anomaly though. It has the highest Republican average result, at nearly 60%. Safe R
PA-08: (McCain 51.9%-47.1%, GOP 57.3%-42.7%) The geography of the new state forces York and Dauphin Counties into one district. Democratic-leaning Dauphin County gets easily overtaken by strongly Republican York County (York outnumbers Dauphin by about a 5:3 margin). Obama ran relatively strong in this district in 2008, but that remains to be an anomaly just like PA-07. Safe R
PA-09: (Obama 56.6%-42.1%, Dem 54.6%-45.4%) This is the Lehigh Valley district (with all of Lehigh and Northampton Counties). On paper, this should be a Lean D district. However, Charlie Dent is a very strong incumbent. Even if everything went right, it's no better than a toss-up for Democrats. Until then: Lean R
PA-10: (Obama 56.5%-42.5%, Dem 55.1%-44.9%) This is the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre district, as Lackawanna and Luzerne Counties make up the bulk of this district. This is traditionally a heavily Democratic working-class district. As 2010 showed, it's not immune to waves. However, I would still rank it: Safe D
PA-11: (McCain 55.0%-43.65, GOP 57.6%-42.4%) This is pretty much the leftovers. It's a fairly rural district that doesn't really have any significant population centres. Additionally, there aren't really any areas of Democratic strength in the district, making it McCain's strongest district in the state. Blue Dog Tim Holden represented a good portion of this district, including all of his home Schuylkill County. The new areas are probably too much, so I would expect this district to go to Lou Barletta (as it includes his home of Hazleton). Safe R

With this map, Obama would've beaten McCain 8-3 in terms of Congressional districts. It's hard to say how 2012 would've turned out, as PA-03 and PA-06 would likely have been extremely tight. At best, Obama may have replicated his 8-3 margin. At worst, it could have been a narrower 6-5 Obama win.

As far as Congress goes, the current situation would be something like 5D-5R-1T. The problem for Democrats is only due in small part from the concentration of strength in Philadelphia. Republicans know how to run strong candidates in this new state (see: Dent, Charlie) and Democrats underperform compared to those at the top of the ticket (see: PA-06). Even a fair map like this in a neutral environment could yield a Republican-majority Congressional delegation in an otherwise Democratic-leaning state. On the other hand, Obama himself has shown that Democrats can in fact easily win 8 out of 11 districts.

[Gass3268]

This information seems like it would be important:

   1960           1970           1980           1990           2000           2010

NE   1,966,067   2,174,059   2,556,726   2,899,938   3,119,536   3,270,572

MA   6,008,066   6,635,895   6,684,191   7,019,889   7,397,416   7,600,196

NY   11,086,097 12,072,547 11,385,432 11,723,167 12,689,665 13,038,826

AD   5,696,207   6,164,420   6,172,640   6,267,288   6,286,792   6,339,276

PA   6,293,552   6,709,711   6,729,612   6,951,093   7,317,947   7,773,451

AY   5,025,814   5,084,198   5,134,283   4,930,550   4,963,107   4,928,928

MD   4,310,937   5,227,013   5,449,646   6,054,536   6,652,145   7,273,209

NF   2,212,729   2,807,236   3,806,408   5,132,107   6,413,795   7,762,275

SF   2,738,831   3,982,207   5,939,916   7,805,819   9,568,583   11,039,035

[Antonio the Sixth]

Fantastic job, Politicallefty! This is exactly the kind of analysis I so badly wanted to see.

Also, glad that I wasn't too far off the mark when I expected Democrats to have 6/11 seats.

[traininthedistance]

I might do a couple Northeastern states at some point.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Added South Florida to the list. C'mon people, we need more maps!

[JerryArkansas]

I now can get all of the northeast done on one map.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Added the three Texas splitoffs. Come on guys, let's get this started!

[Gass3268]

I would if I could, but DRA for whatever reason doesn't work on my computer anymore. Runs too slow!

[Cranberry]

Tried myself with a state, hope it's not an entire disaster

Rio Grande

With Legislature and Governor's Mansion in different hands, it will likely come to an agreement that will try to secure seats for one or another party. However, both the geographical distribution of voters and a likely strong democratic majority in both chambers will favour the Democrats, leading to the following proposal:

RG-01: (Obama: 65,7%-34,3%; Dem: 62,2%-37,8%) (Hisp VAP - 78,1%; SSRV - 66.2%)
The district containing all of El Paso and some parts of exurban El Paso County is as safe Democratic as it gets. More than two-thirds Hispanic, the district is basically the old 16th CD. Safe Dem MM

RG-02: (Obama: 55,0%-45,0%; Dem: 55,7%-45,3%) (75,6% / 64,8%)
Stretching from remaining parts of El Paso County until Laredo and the San Antonio Metro, the district is a more Democratic version of the old 23rd, but morphing into a fairly democratic one, likely only competetive in wave elections. Likely Dem MM

RG-03: (McCain: 60,9%-31,1%; GOP: 65,4%-34,6%) (17,3% / 10,4%)
Combining the areas to the north of both San Antonio and Austin, and taking a small portion of suburban Williamson County, Rio Grande's 3rd district is a natural stronghold for the GOP. Safe GOP

RG-04: (Obama: 61,8%-38,2%; Dem: 54,7%-45,3%) (37,2% / 19,7%)
This district encompasses Austin and Williamson County southeast of I-35. While Obama surely overperformed there in 2008, the district nevertheless is moving rapidly towards the Democrats, albeit partisan numbers are a little less democratic. Safe Dem

RG-05: (Obama: 58,9%-41,1%; Dem: 52,3%-47,7%) (20,9% / 13,0%)
Austin west of I-35 and Hays County. The less Democratic part of the city, nevertheless leans towards that party. Likely Dem

RG-06: (McCain: 64,0%-36,0%; GOP: 70,1%-29,9%) (31,1% / 21,4%)
The district inbetween San Antonio and Austin, taking conservative suburban areas from the first, is the most Republican district in the state. Safe GOP

RG-07: (Obama: 58,0%-42,0%; Dem: 53,9%-46,1%) (63,4% / 53,1%)
The greatest part of San Antonio, about everything west of I-35. Again did Obama overperform here, yet the district is sustainably Democratic, so just in play for the GOP in wave years. Likely Dem MM

RG-08: (McCain: 59,2%-40,8%; GOP: 56,6%-43,4%) (43,6% / 35,6%)
The east of the state, from the southernmost parts of the Austin Metro down to the Gulf Coast and until Corpus Christi. The least Republican of the three GOP districts, yet still far away from being in play for the Democrats. Safe GOP

RG-09: (Obama: 57,2%-42,8%; Dem: 56,6%-43,3%) (59,2% / 49,2%)
This is the district containing south-east San Antonio, and down the San Antonio River Valley until before Corpus Christi. Safe Dem MM

RG-10: (Obama: 66,7%-33,3%; Dem: 66,8%-33,2% ) (86,1% / 78,5%)
Basically the leftovers south of Laredo and Corpus Christi, this heavily Hispanic area is certainly one of the most democratic areas in the country. Overall the most Democratic district in Rio Grande. Safe Dem MM

RG-11: (Obama: 67,9%-32,1%; Dem: 65,5%-34,5%) (86,9% / 78,0%)
This district encompasses Cameron County and some areas of Hidalgo County along the river, including McAllen. THis was Obama's strongest district in 2008. Safe Dem MM


Under normal circumstances one could except a 8D-3R delegation. In wave years, the GOP could possibly win the 5th and 7th district, maybe also the 2nd, resulting to a maximum 6R-5D map. The 3 GOP and 5 Democratic seats however are uncontestable.

[muon2]

Tried myself with a state, hope it's not an entire disaster

Rio Grande

With Legislature and Governor's Mansion in different hands, it will likely come to an agreement that will try to secure seats for one or another party. However, both the geographical distribution of voters and a likely strong democratic majority in both chambers will favour the Democrats, leading to the following proposal:

RG-01: (Obama: 65,7%-34,3%; Dem: 62,2%-37,8%)
The district containing all of El Paso and some parts of exurban El Paso County is as safe Democratic as it gets. More than two-thirds Hispanic, the district is basically the old 16th CD. Safe Dem

RG-02: (Obama: 55,0%-45,0%; Dem: 55,7%-45,3%)
Stretching from remaining parts of El Paso County until Laredo and the San Antonio Metro, the district is a more Democratic version of the old 23rd, but morphing into a fairly democratic one, likely only competetive in wave elections. Likely Dem

RG-03: (McCain: 60,9%-31,1%; GOP: 65,4%-34,6%)
Combining the areas to the north of both San Antonio and Austin, and taking a small portion of suburban Williamson County, Rio Grande's 3rd district is a natural stronghold for the GOP. Safe GOP

RG-04: (Obama: 61,8%-38,2%; Dem: 54,7%-45,3%)
This district encompasses Austin and Williamson County southeast of I-35. While Obama surely overperformed there in 2008, the district nevertheless is moving rapidly towards the Democrats, albeit partisan numbers are a little less democratic. Safe Dem

RG-05: (Obama: 58,9%-41,1%; Dem: 52,3%-47,7%)
Austin west of I-35 and Hays County. The less Democratic part of the city, nevertheless leans towards that party. Likely Dem

RG-06: (McCain: 64,0%-36,0%; GOP: 70,1%-29,9%)
The district inbetween San Antonio and Austin, taking conservative suburban areas from the first, is the most Republican district in the state. Safe GOP

RG-07: (Obama: 58,0%-42,0%; Dem: 53,9%-46,1%)
The greatest part of San Antonio, about everything west of I-35. Again did Obama overperform here, yet the district is sustainably Democratic, so just in play for the GOP in wave years. Likely Dem

RG-08: (McCain: 59,2%-40,8%; GOP: 56,6%-43,4%)
The east of the state, from the southernmost parts of the Austin Metro down to the Gulf Coast and until Corpus Christi. The least Republican of the three GOP districts, yet still far away from being in play for the Democrats. Safe GOP

RG-09: (Obama: 57,2%-42,8%; Dem: 56,6%-43,3%)
This is the district containing south-east San Antonio, and down the San Antonio River Valley until before Corpus Christi. Safe Dem

RG-10: (Obama: 66,7%-33,3%; Dem: 66,8%-33,2% )
Basically the leftovers south of Laredo and Corpus Christi, this heavily Hispanic area is certainly one of the most democratic areas in the country. Overall the most Democratic district in Rio Grande. Safe Dem

RG-11: (Obama: 67,9%-32,1%; Dem: 65,5%-34,5%)
This district encompasses Cameron County and some areas of Hidalgo County along the river, including McAllen. THis was Obama's strongest district in 2008. Safe Dem


Under normal circumstances one could except a 8D-3R delegation. In wave years, the GOP could possibly win the 5th and 7th district, maybe also the 2nd, resulting to a maximum 6R-5D map. The 3 GOP and 5 Democratic seats however are uncontestable.

It looks nice, but section 2 of the VRA needs to be considered. What are the HVAPs for the districts and for the state overall? I'm worried that RG-11 might be overpacked with Latinos.

[Gass3268]

It looks nice, but section 2 of the VRA needs to be considered. What are the HVAPs for the districts and for the state overall? I'm worried that RG-11 might be overpacked with Latinos.

Yeah we are going to need some Fajitas strips here.

[Antonio the Sixth]

How exactly do the VRA requirements work? I assume a state like RG would need at least 3 Hispanic-majority districts, but I'm not sure how that number is supposed to be calculated.

[muon2]

How exactly do the VRA requirements work? I assume a state like RG would need at least 3 Hispanic-majority districts, but I'm not sure how that number is supposed to be calculated.

The VRA requires that racial and ethnic minorities have the ability to elect the representatives of their choice. Generally this means that when there is a minority population that votes significantly different than the white majority, and there is a compact district that has 50% or more of that minority of the citizens of voting age, then a district must be drawn to accommodate the minority.

In TX the state used the registered voters with Spanish surnames (SSVR) to determine the Hispanic population for the VRA. There are 6 CDs in TX that overlap your RG state that have a majority SSVR. Those districts have HVAPs that go from 64.9% to 79.0%. In addition a TX-35 that links San Antonio to Austin has a 44% SSVR and a 58.3% HVAP. MALDEF submitted its own plans in opposition to the TX plan, and those plans provide for seven CDs in south TX that would have the Hispanic strength sufficient to elect the candidates of their choice.

Using those a plan like MALDEFs would probably leave a map with 7 Latino seats and 4 Pub seats in your RG. There is a SCOTUS decision that says that one need not maximize the minority seats as long as the number of such seats are in rough proportionality to the minority population in the state as a whole. Your state of RG has 41.8% SSVR and 53.4% HVAP. This corresponds to 4.6 out of 11 seats, so the Dems in RG could definitely get by with 5 Latino seats and maybe get by with only 4 seats, but certainly not less than that.

[muon2]

As I look at TX more closely, I'm not sure there would be a Dem gerrymander. Obama got 53.2% of the two party vote there in 2008, which is fractionally less than the 53.7% he got nationwide. The DRA election average gives the Dems 49.96% of the vote, so RG would be a very swingy state. Since 2010 was a GOP wave, it's likely that the Pubs would hold at least the Gov or one chamber of the legislature, so it is highly unlikely that the Dems get their best map. If no compromise is reached, the large Latino population makes a court-ordered map a strong possibility.

[Cranberry]

There are 6 Hispanic Minority Majority districts under my plan, 5 if we even just count the SSRV, so it should be very consistent with the VRA. That's quite funny considering I completely forgot about it and didn't draw my districts with that intent
Anyways, I added the numbers to the districts.

As I look at TX more closely, I'm not sure there would be a Dem gerrymander. Obama got 53.2% of the two party vote there in 2008, which is fractionally less than the 53.7% he got nationwide. The DRA election average gives the Dems 49.96% of the vote, so RG would be a very swingy state. Since 2010 was a GOP wave, it's likely that the Pubs would hold at least the Gov or one chamber of the legislature, so it is highly unlikely that the Dems get their best map. If no compromise is reached, the large Latino population makes a court-ordered map a strong possibility.

I modelled the districts under Antonio's "orders" - Governor a Republican, both chambers Democratic majority. Given that constellation, I find it highly likely to come to a incumbent-projection, little competition map, which this map is. I don't think the Republicans would have captured a chamber even in 2010, given that South Texas is basically the opposite of the rest of the nation when it comes to electoral geopgraphy - Democrats are distributed over a far larger area than Republicans, and also strong in rural areas.

[Antonio the Sixth]

That seems like an excellent redistricting plan, Cranberry. The borders look very nice, so if it's also VRA-compliant there's no need to look any further!

Muon, it might seem surprising in light of statewide results but yes, local Democrats tend to have the upper hand in this area of Texas. Just look at the House results: Democrats hold 7 of 11 seats even despite living in a nominally R-gerrymandered map. The same is true in the State Legislature. According to my calculations, Democrats hold almost 3/4 of the Texas House of Representatives seats in the area corresponding to RG.

[Sol]

Cranberry, that TX map looks nice. THe only change I'd suggest is changing around the Austin area a bit- I suspect the courts or the RG state leg would prefer one district based in the city and one in the suburbs.

[Cranberry]

Austin is quite a bit of a Demmander. By giving the most conservative parts of its suburbs to the 3rd district, the 4th and 5th both take up enough of the inner city to keep both districts relatively safe Democratic, but in wafe years. Your splitting of the area would likely result in the 3rd district compeletly getting out of the suburbs, and just taking in the exurbs, becoming a tad less republican that way, while the inner city district and the suburbs district would likely be safe dem or safe rep, respectively. So that's basically where I got the additional Democratic seat from... A Dem legislature would prefer my proposal (2D-1R) over 2R-1D, naturally.

Thanks Antonio
Might be that I make Jefferson and Texas too - I just love the electoral geography of OTL Texas

[muon2]

There are 6 Hispanic Minority Majority districts under my plan, 5 if we even just count the SSRV, so it should be very consistent with the VRA. That's quite funny considering I completely forgot about it and didn't draw my districts with that intent
Anyways, I added the numbers to the districts.

As I look at TX more closely, I'm not sure there would be a Dem gerrymander. Obama got 53.2% of the two party vote there in 2008, which is fractionally less than the 53.7% he got nationwide. The DRA election average gives the Dems 49.96% of the vote, so RG would be a very swingy state. Since 2010 was a GOP wave, it's likely that the Pubs would hold at least the Gov or one chamber of the legislature, so it is highly unlikely that the Dems get their best map. If no compromise is reached, the large Latino population makes a court-ordered map a strong possibility.

I modelled the districts under Antonio's "orders" - Governor a Republican, both chambers Democratic majority. Given that constellation, I find it highly likely to come to a incumbent-projection, little competition map, which this map is. I don't think the Republicans would have captured a chamber even in 2010, given that South Texas is basically the opposite of the rest of the nation when it comes to electoral geopgraphy - Democrats are distributed over a far larger area than Republicans, and also strong in rural areas.

There's no way a Pub Gov would sign onto a plan with only 3 of 11 seats for the GOP. More likely, he'd cut a deal with the Latinos to strengthen their chances in the SSVR majority seats, so that they are all at least D+8 (61.2%+ Obama '08), in exchange for swing seats that lean GOP.

Here's an example that has few county splits and has all districts within 1000 of the quota.



RG-1 (HVAP 77.9%): O'08 65.3%, D+12
RG-2 (HVAP 81.8%): O'08 61.3%, D+8
RG-3 (HVAP 78.3%): O'08 70.5%, D+17
RG-4 : O'08 49.0%, R+5
RG-5 : O'08 31.2%, R+23
RG-6 : O'08 70.4%, D+17
RG-7 : O'08 53.1%, R+1
RG-8 : O'08 40.1%, R+14
RG-9 : O'08 40.6%, R+13
RG-10 (HVAP 83.4%): O'08 64.3%, D+11
RG-11 (HVAP 85.9%): O'08 66.9%, D+13

[muon2]

That seems like an excellent redistricting plan, Cranberry. The borders look very nice, so if it's also VRA-compliant there's no need to look any further!

Muon, it might seem surprising in light of statewide results but yes, local Democrats tend to have the upper hand in this area of Texas. Just look at the House results: Democrats hold 7 of 11 seats even despite living in a nominally R-gerrymandered map. The same is true in the State Legislature. According to my calculations, Democrats hold almost 3/4 of the Texas House of Representatives seats in the area corresponding to RG.

The Dems might well be down one additional US House seat but for the VRA requirements on the state of TX as a whole. It would be easy to take my map and make both of the swing seats, solid R without compromising any of the R seats or changing the VRA seats, which a Pub gerrymander certainly would do. The Texas HoR is a court-ordered map and after the favorable 2012 election the Dems hold 30 of the 47 seats in the RG counties (64%). I don't know how many of those are in play for 2014.

Edit: It looks like statewide VRA compliance also affects the TX HoR. For example Bexar county is 43.1% SSVR, but 7 of the 10 House districts are drawn with an SSVR majority, this leads to the current 8D-2R margin. Yet overall the county is close to national average, being about 1% more R than the nation in 2008. That would project a roughly equal split of House districts between the parties. Given the numerous easy VRA districts that can be drawn along the Rio Grande, I doubt that RG would have to gerrymander Bexar to meet the VRA.