FL: Rereredistricting

[RBH]

That peninsula into Ocala will not pass the FL constitution. The wrap of FL-10 around FL-5 and the FL-5 finger into Sanford in the RL map have been cited by the court as failing tier-2 requirements. Can you justify it?

my thinking on the Ocala thing is like this: Splitting Ocala wouldn't be allowed.

Marion County is 331298 people, Ocala is 57468.

You take Marion County out of any district, then FL2 needs 35,707 people, FL3 needs 183,744 people and FL11 needs 111,882 people.

On reworking things, FL11/FL2 can get the people and FL3 can get Ocala.



So, that means..

FL2: 67.1/32.9 JMC. (77w/14aa/5h)
FL3: 54.3/45.7 JMC. (71w/15aa/9h)
FL11: 56.4/43.6 JMC (81w/10h/6aa)

compared to this from the "Gainesville in 3" map:

FL2: 67.1-32.9 JMC (78w-14aa-5h)
FL3: 54.6-45.4 JMC (72w-14aa-9h)
FL11: 55.9-44.1 JMC (79w-10h-7aa)

[Torie]

Here is my little attempt for Northern Florida from a Pub point of view that attempts to keep the result oriented Dem friendly FLOTUS from having an excuse the draw the map themselves. It's predicated on the theory that it attempts to keep the Orlando area black and Hispanic communities together as communities of interest without creating additional chops. Whether that will fly, as opposed to FLOTUS coming up with some theory that the black and Hispanic communities need to be in separate CD's, is an open question. FLOTUS is very creative in coming up with theories to do what they want to do.

FL-07 is about a 2% Pub PVI.





Here is a version with a slightly different chop of FL-09 into Osceola, that gets the Hispanic percentage up a tad, and makes FL-09 look less erose. FLOTUS does seem to share my hypersensitivity to erosity. 

[/URL]

[Skill and Chance]

Here is my little attempt for Northern Florida from a Pub point of view that attempts to keep the result oriented Dem friendly FLOTUS from having an excuse the draw the map themselves. It's predicated on the theory that it attempts to keep the Orlando area black and Hispanic communities together as communities of interest without creating additional chops. Whether that will fly, as opposed to FLOTUS coming up with some theory that the black and Hispanic communities need to be in separate CD's, is an open question. FLOTUS is very creative in coming up with theories to do what they want to do.

FL-07 is about a 2% Pub PVI.





Here is a version with a slightly different chop of FL-09 into Osceola, that gets the Hispanic percentage up a tad, and makes FL-09 look less erose. FLOTUS does seem to share my hypersensitivity to erosity it seems.

[/URL]

How does FL-10 fare?

[Torie]

6.5% Pub PVI for my FL-10.

[Nyvin]

I made a map that tries to split as few counties as possible, although it's obviously impossible to avoid this altogether.   I actually tried to limit any partisan flips since I know the FL GOP will do just that as well.    Here's Northern Florida


image hosting

FL-1: Unchanged, R+21
FL-2: R+19
FL-3: R+10
FL-4: R+17
FL-5: D+10
FL-6: R+3

FL-5 is 44.1% African American.

Central Florida


upload a gif

FL-7: R+6
FL-8: R+7
FL-9: D+7
FL-10: D+4
FL-11: R+11
FL-12: R+6
FL-13: D+3
FL-14: D+8
FL-15: Mostly Unchanged, R+7
FL-16: R+5

FL-16 is in the usual spot just south of FL-13.   FL-9 is 43.9% hispanic.    FL-10 is 26.7% African American.

[Nyvin]

Here is my little attempt for Northern Florida from a Pub point of view that attempts to keep the result oriented Dem friendly FLOTUS from having an excuse the draw the map themselves. It's predicated on the theory that it attempts to keep the Orlando area black and Hispanic communities together as communities of interest without creating additional chops. Whether that will fly, as opposed to FLOTUS coming up with some theory that the black and Hispanic communities need to be in separate CD's, is an open question. FLOTUS is very creative in coming up with theories to do what they want to do.

FL-07 is about a 2% Pub PVI.





Here is a version with a slightly different chop of FL-09 into Osceola, that gets the Hispanic percentage up a tad, and makes FL-09 look less erose. FLOTUS does seem to share my hypersensitivity to erosity.  

[/URL]

It looks like this map would make really UGLY FL-11's and FL-12's without having any of Lake or Marion county in FL-11, and also FL-13 needing to be entirely within Pinellas and FL-14 being entirely within Hillsborough.

Also I can't imagine this would fly since they made a court order about splitting Hendry county with it's hispanic populaiton, and Hendry County only has a population of 37,000 or so.    Osceola has about 276,000 and is a much bigger population of minorities to be split.

[Torie]

I basically used Wasserman's map on the Cook Political Report site as a template, but didn't like what he did in the Orlando area, so I "fixed" that. His lines between FL-15 and FL-17 seem to involve an extra and unnecessary chop (see below), but then the current map seems to do the same thing, so whatever. I would probably get rid of that if possible. Wasserman seems a bit cavalier about chops.

[Skill and Chance]

I made a map that tries to split as few counties as possible, although it's obviously impossible to avoid this altogether.   I actually tried to limit any partisan flips since I know the FL GOP will do just that as well.    Here's Northern Florida


image hosting

FL-1: Unchanged, R+21
FL-2: R+19
FL-3: R+10
FL-4: R+17
FL-5: D+10
FL-6: R+3

FL-5 is 44.1% African American.

Central Florida


upload a gif

FL-7: R+6
FL-8: R+7
FL-9: D+7
FL-10: D+4
FL-11: R+11
FL-12: R+6
FL-13: D+3
FL-14: D+8
FL-15: Mostly Unchanged, R+7
FL-16: R+5

FL-16 is in the usual spot just south of FL-13.   FL-9 is 43.9% hispanic.    FL-10 is 26.7% African American.

So it is clearly only necessary to split Orange 3 or fewer ways, and it looks like it would be straightforward to put that one precinct to the west back in FL-09.  Is FL-10 majority-minority?  I expect the plaintiffs and/or citizens groups to submit an alternative map like this one during the review process if the legislature does anything with 4 or more splits.

[Torie]

"So it is clearly only necessary to split Orange 3 or fewer ways, and it looks like it would be straightforward to put that one precinct to the west back in FL-09.  Is FL-10 majority-minority?  I expect the plaintiffs and/or citizens groups to submit an alternative map like this one during the review process if the legislature does anything with 4 or more splits."

Yes, that is why I cut Orange down to a tri-chop in part. However, that FL-07 in that map above is a mess, with traveling chops and you name it. If FLOTUS falls in love with that, in lieu of say something like I did, then they really are way, way out there. What they might do as an excuse, is demand a max Hispanic CD to get the black precincts into another CD, and create another Dem CD, but there is nothing in the law that requires that, and a max Hispanic CD, would still elect a white liberal anyway.

"Also I can't imagine this would fly since they made a court order about splitting Hendry county with it's hispanic populaiton, and Hendry County only has a population of 37,000 or so.    Osceola has about 276,000 and is a much bigger population of minorities to be split."

I don't understand the comment above. Hendry is way south. The Hispanic contiguous area in the Orlando area spills over into Osceola, and is picked up to the extent it can, without another chop. Doing extra chops to create a heavier minority CD, that will not elect a minority, I think is illegal under Florida law.

[Nyvin]

FL-10 would barely be majority-minority, but the figures are kinda crazy.

49.3% White
26.7% Black
17.8% Hispanic
4.6% Asian

I suppose you could move a few voting blocks around to make a heavier minority population though.

[Nyvin]

I think FL-7 was my least favorite part of the map I made,  it almost definitely wouldn't fly, but the reasoning was to keep either FL-6 or FL-7 from flipping.  Volusia County can be split to fix it (like everyone else is doing).   FL-8 might be able to keep it's original shape that way too.

[Skill and Chance]

FL-10 would barely be majority-minority, but the figures are kinda crazy.

49.3% White
26.7% Black
17.8% Hispanic
4.6% Asian

I suppose you could move a few voting blocks around to make a heavier minority population though.

Then it is possible to do 2 clean majority-minority districts in Orlando.  I have little doubt that the court will ultimately favor that.

[muon2]

Torie, What happens to Indian River county in your plan? Doesn't that create a chain reaction to the south or cause other linkage changes to the west?


I think this would be an easier sell to the FLSC. There is minimal impact to the districts of So FL. It reduces chops in Polk and Hillsborough and the chop in Osceola is exactly the city of Poinciana. The whole county area that includes my FL 7,8,9,10 less Poinciana is 1205 people over population. Under the FL constitutional tiers (population equality and political boundaries are of equal importance) and SCOTUS WV decision that should be an acceptable population deviation.



BTW
CD 7 is R+5
CD 10 is R+4

[Torie]

Torie, What happens to Indian River county in your plan? Doesn't that create a chain reaction to the south or cause other linkage changes to the west?


I think this would be an easier sell to the FLSC. There is minimal impact to the districts of So FL. It reduces chops in Polk and Hillsborough and the chop in Osceola is exactly the city of Poinciana. The whole county area that includes my FL 7,8,9,10 less Poinciana is 1205 people over population. Under the FL constitutional tiers (population equality and political boundaries are of equal importance) and SCOTUS WV decision that should be an acceptable population deviation.



BTW
CD 7 is R+5
CD 10 is R+4

Look at the Wasserman map. It seemed to not have any problems that popped out at me down south. Yes, it may have made some changes, but that should not necessarily be a deal killer, if it makes for a better map overall, based on chops and erosity. I think a quad chop of Orange should be avoided if possible.

Florida law requires precise population equality if I recall correctly, so forget WV.

[muon2]

Torie, What happens to Indian River county in your plan? Doesn't that create a chain reaction to the south or cause other linkage changes to the west?


I think this would be an easier sell to the FLSC. There is minimal impact to the districts of So FL. It reduces chops in Polk and Hillsborough and the chop in Osceola is exactly the city of Poinciana. The whole county area that includes my FL 7,8,9,10 less Poinciana is 1205 people over population. Under the FL constitutional tiers (population equality and political boundaries are of equal importance) and SCOTUS WV decision that should be an acceptable population deviation.



BTW
CD 7 is R+5
CD 10 is R+4

Look at the Wasserman map. It seemed to not have any problems that popped out at me down south. Yes, it may have made some changes, but that should not necessarily be a deal killer, if it makes for a better map overall, based on chops and erosity. I think a quad chop of Orange should be avoided if possible.

Florida law requires precise population equality if I recall correctly, so forget WV.

Florida law uses the exact language that SCOUTS used "equal as nearly practicable". The FLSC made a point of citing decisions since 2011 such as the one for Section 4, and noted that the map should comport with current SCOTUS decisions. Tier two specifically puts population equality on an equal footing as maintaining political boundaries, so I do think that unequal districts would be acceptable if applied as part of the tier two standards. Tell me if you read the FL decision differently.

I'm not sure I wouldn't challenge Wasserman's plan on the basis of partisan intent. FLSC made it abundantly clear that if there was any sign of partisan intent, then it would give no deference to the legislative plan. I read that as a warning that it would draw it's own plan if the GA didn't play nice.

[Torie]

Your reading seems reasonable, but I would be careful about departing from population equality, in the absence of FLOTUS expressly stated that departing from strict equality was desirable to reduce chops, unless whatever map is drawn would still be the best map if the inequalities were unwound. Otherwise,  FLOTUS might use that as a weapon, or at least view it as a negative factor. And I agree about the partisan intent specter. But if a better map can be made respecting political boundaries, and restraining erosity, I don't think that is a deal killer. Your map looks more erose to me than mine. Stuff heads to be reworked around Orlando, and if that means Indian River changes districts to make the best map, it certainly should be considered. If there is an equally good map that does less for the Pubs, than that is a problem, I would agree.

Does switching Indian River make for more "rational" CD's in Palm Beach and Broward?  That perhaps is another critical issue.

Finally, what is the downside? The big play is whether there is a second Dem CD in the Orlando area. That turns on whether FLOTUS accepts a continuous minority CD in the Orlando area that can really elect a minority, as opposed to two majority minority CD's based on population neither of which will. If they don't, FLOTUS will instantly find partisan intent. What is the downside of moving FL-18 in a Pub direction, if the downside is just to unwind that? No doubt FLOTUS will be aware of all of the map alternatives, including yours.

[Nyvin]

It's quite obvious there is partisan intent if you split up the hispanic majority-minority currently in FL-9 and make it a African American and Hispanic mixed district like both of yours are.    I don't see how the FLSC could possibly look past that.   

There isn't much reason to change FL-9 beyond just creating a different vote sink for the Democrats,  FL-10 can easily take up the absence of FL-5 in Orange.

[Torie]

It's quite obvious there is partisan intent if you split up the hispanic majority-minority currently in FL-9 and make it a African American and Hispanic mixed district like both of yours are.    I don't see how the FLSC could possibly look past that.    

There isn't much reason to change FL-9 beyond just creating a different vote sink for the Democrats,  FL-10 can easily take up the absence of FL-5 in Orange.

That is the 64,000 dollar question of course, as I just posted above. The minority packing is of a contiguous area, makes for a compact CD, and it is the only way to elect a minority, although that would not be guaranteed, but if Hispanics are willing to vote for a black to some extent in a Dem primary, or blacks an Hispanic to some extent, it will happen. Having two Dem CD's means electing two white liberals, and shutting out a minority congressperson.  What percentage of Hispanics in Orlando are black, and what percent of the Dem primary voters in a minority packed CD will be black? And can one use updated census figures for this evidentiary exercise, is another important question. And again, what is the downside to the Pubs of at least trying to go there, rather than throwing in the towel?

If the evidentiary record can be made strong enough, it would be worth it, just to force FLOTUS to put pen to paper screwing a minority out of a seat, to hatch another Dem seat, if it chose to go there. If nothing else, it will help sow division in the Dem ranks. In that regard, the Pubs would be smart, to round up minority community support, and get them to testify,  for their little packing plan.

[muon2]

It's quite obvious there is partisan intent if you split up the hispanic majority-minority currently in FL-9 and make it a African American and Hispanic mixed district like both of yours are.    I don't see how the FLSC could possibly look past that.    

There isn't much reason to change FL-9 beyond just creating a different vote sink for the Democrats,  FL-10 can easily take up the absence of FL-5 in Orange.

That is the 64,000,000 dollar question of course, as I just posted above. The minority packing is of a contiguous area, makes for a compact CD, and it the only way to elect a minority, although that would not be guaranteed, but if Hispanics are willing to vote for a black to some extent in a Dem primary, or blacks an Hispanic to some extent, it will happen. Having two Dem CD's means electing two white liberals, and shutting out a minority congressperson.  What percentage of Hispanics in Orlando are black, and what percent of the Dem primary voters in a minority packed CD will be black? And can one use updated census figures for this evidentiary exercise, is another important question. And again, what is the downside to the Pubs of at least trying to go there, rather than throwing in the towel?

In my initial offering I put FL-10 into Orlando and made minimal changes to FL-9 to both comply with the FL Constitution's requirement to provide minority opportunity districts and avoid partisan intent - the tier 1 requirements. Language from FL suggests that this goes beyond the required VRA districts, and follows the option made available in Bartlett v Strickland. I don't think estimated data can be considered so the only whole state data set is from 2010.

[Brittain33]

The minority packing is of a contiguous area, makes for a compact CD, and it is the only way to elect a minority, although that would not be guaranteed, but if Hispanics are willing to vote for a black to some extent in a Dem primary, or blacks an Hispanic to some extent, it will happen. Having two Dem CD's means electing two white liberals, and shutting out a minority congressperson.  

Do we have historical evidence of racial block voting in Democratic primaries in this area, so that there is a candidate of the "white community"'s choice who will defeat a candidate reflecting the choice of the black or Hispanic communities? The race of the candidate himself is somewhat related to that, but it varies a lot. I'm not trying to be difficult here, but Central Florida is really unlike places like L.A. County or Brooklyn where this equation is usually considered.

[Torie]

It's quite obvious there is partisan intent if you split up the hispanic majority-minority currently in FL-9 and make it a African American and Hispanic mixed district like both of yours are.    I don't see how the FLSC could possibly look past that.    

There isn't much reason to change FL-9 beyond just creating a different vote sink for the Democrats,  FL-10 can easily take up the absence of FL-5 in Orange.

That is the 64,000,000 dollar question of course, as I just posted above. The minority packing is of a contiguous area, makes for a compact CD, and it the only way to elect a minority, although that would not be guaranteed, but if Hispanics are willing to vote for a black to some extent in a Dem primary, or blacks an Hispanic to some extent, it will happen. Having two Dem CD's means electing two white liberals, and shutting out a minority congressperson.  What percentage of Hispanics in Orlando are black, and what percent of the Dem primary voters in a minority packed CD will be black? And can one use updated census figures for this evidentiary exercise, is another important question. And again, what is the downside to the Pubs of at least trying to go there, rather than throwing in the towel?

In my initial offering I put FL-10 into Orlando and made minimal changes to FL-9 to both comply with the FL Constitution's requirement to provide minority opportunity districts and avoid partisan intent - the tier 1 requirements. Language from FL suggests that this goes beyond the required VRA districts, and follows the option made available in Bartlett v Strickland. I don't think estimated data can be considered so the only whole state data set is from 2010.

Yes, I agree that the FL constitution goes beyond the VRA, and seems to get close to requiring crossover CD's, at least, or perhaps in particular,  if all the other redistricting rules are honored to the letter, which I think my FL-10 does. Whether FLOTUS will go there if it hurts the Dems is another question. What is your authority for excluding estimated data in this content when the lines are redrawn years later? If nothing else, the estimated data can be used to refute partisan intent, and that the intent was to help elect a minority candidate, given the current facts on the ground. The partisan intent factor is not a federal issue obviously, and obviously estimated data cannot be used to find a Section 2 violation, but that is not what is in play here.

[Nyvin]

The minority packing is of a contiguous area, makes for a compact CD, and it is the only way to elect a minority, although that would not be guaranteed, but if Hispanics are willing to vote for a black to some extent in a Dem primary, or blacks an Hispanic to some extent, it will happen. Having two Dem CD's means electing two white liberals, and shutting out a minority congressperson.  

Do we have historical evidence of racial block voting in Democratic primaries in this area, so that there is a candidate of the "white community"'s choice who will defeat a candidate reflecting the choice of the black or Hispanic communities? The race of the candidate himself is somewhat related to that, but it varies a lot. I'm not trying to be difficult here, but Central Florida is really unlike places like L.A. County or Brooklyn where this equation is usually considered.

The Puerto Rican population in the Orlando area is relatively new (compared to other majority minority areas at least...).     I don't know if FL-9 was drawn intentionally as a majority minority district, but it follows along the same guidelines of separating the African American population in FL-24 from the Hispanic (Cuban) populations in FL-25 or FL-27.   

If they're just going to cram them together they're no reason to think that FL-24 to the south shouldn't be called out as a vote sink and joined with the surrounding districts as well.

[Torie]

The minority packing is of a contiguous area, makes for a compact CD, and it is the only way to elect a minority, although that would not be guaranteed, but if Hispanics are willing to vote for a black to some extent in a Dem primary, or blacks an Hispanic to some extent, it will happen. Having two Dem CD's means electing two white liberals, and shutting out a minority congressperson.  

Do we have historical evidence of racial block voting in Democratic primaries in this area, so that there is a candidate of the "white community"'s choice who will defeat a candidate reflecting the choice of the black or Hispanic communities? The race of the candidate himself is somewhat related to that, but it varies a lot. I'm not trying to be difficult here, but Central Florida is really unlike places like L.A. County or Brooklyn where this equation is usually considered.

It's a relevant question, and I have no idea. My sense of it however, is that there is racial block voting in Florida (e.g., the Jews and the blacks don't seem to get along very well in Broward and Palm Beach counties in Dem primaries). The issue however, is whether blacks would rather vote for a white than an Hispanic, and Hispanics, whites over blacks, in Dem primaries. I am not sure there is any evidence available as to that. And the Cuban data, would not be relevant, since so many of them tend to be Pubs.

[TJ in Oregon]

The minority packing is of a contiguous area, makes for a compact CD, and it is the only way to elect a minority, although that would not be guaranteed, but if Hispanics are willing to vote for a black to some extent in a Dem primary, or blacks an Hispanic to some extent, it will happen. Having two Dem CD's means electing two white liberals, and shutting out a minority congressperson.  

Do we have historical evidence of racial block voting in Democratic primaries in this area, so that there is a candidate of the "white community"'s choice who will defeat a candidate reflecting the choice of the black or Hispanic communities? The race of the candidate himself is somewhat related to that, but it varies a lot. I'm not trying to be difficult here, but Central Florida is really unlike places like L.A. County or Brooklyn where this equation is usually considered.

The Puerto Rican population in the Orlando area is relatively new (compared to other majority minority areas at least...).     I don't know if FL-9 was drawn intentionally as a majority minority district, but it follows along the same guidelines of separating the African American population in FL-24 from the Hispanic (Cuban) populations in FL-25 or FL-27.   

If they're just going to cram them together they're no reason to think that FL-24 to the south shouldn't be called out as a vote sink and joined with the surrounding districts as well.

I believe FL-24 is a Section 2 VRA seat and can't be carved up under federal law regardless of what the Florida law says.

[Nyvin]

The minority packing is of a contiguous area, makes for a compact CD, and it is the only way to elect a minority, although that would not be guaranteed, but if Hispanics are willing to vote for a black to some extent in a Dem primary, or blacks an Hispanic to some extent, it will happen. Having two Dem CD's means electing two white liberals, and shutting out a minority congressperson.  

Do we have historical evidence of racial block voting in Democratic primaries in this area, so that there is a candidate of the "white community"'s choice who will defeat a candidate reflecting the choice of the black or Hispanic communities? The race of the candidate himself is somewhat related to that, but it varies a lot. I'm not trying to be difficult here, but Central Florida is really unlike places like L.A. County or Brooklyn where this equation is usually considered.

The Puerto Rican population in the Orlando area is relatively new (compared to other majority minority areas at least...).     I don't know if FL-9 was drawn intentionally as a majority minority district, but it follows along the same guidelines of separating the African American population in FL-24 from the Hispanic (Cuban) populations in FL-25 or FL-27.   

If they're just going to cram them together they're no reason to think that FL-24 to the south shouldn't be called out as a vote sink and joined with the surrounding districts as well.

I believe FL-24 is a Section 2 VRA seat and can't be carved up under federal law regardless of what the Florida law says.

Yes, obviously FL-24 won't be broken up.   The issue is it's a group of minorities under pretty much the same situation as the African Americans in FL-24 that are in Orange and Osceola Counties.