early look at gerrymanders in 2020

[Virginiá]

I believe the Pennyslvania Democrats control the State Supreme Court, which means that Democrats will probably have the upper hand even with split redistricting.

Legislative only, but if Wolf hangs on he can also block Congressional gerrymanders. Of course, this assumes PA Republicans do not attempt to change the system by putting a constitutional amendment on the ballot before 2021. Last I recall, there were rumblings of reform now that conservatives are on the other side of redistricting.

[I’m not Stu]

I believe the Pennyslvania Democrats control the State Supreme Court, which means that Democrats will probably have the upper hand even with split redistricting.

Democrats do, in fact, control the PA Supreme Court. 2 Republicans and 5 Democrats.

[This is Eharding, guys]

OH: likely loses a GOP leaning district because rural districts are less populated.

That is incredibly terrible reasoning. Rural districts are just as populated as urban districts. Since Ohio went for Trump by eight points, it would be easy for the GOP to eliminate Tim Ryan's district if the GOP gerrymander stays. But that gerrymander probably won't stay due to the likely victory of an independent redistricting commission extension initiative in 2018.

RealClear Politics says it would be difficult to eliminate GOP seats in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan; maybe because rural populations are declining more quickly. Tim Ryan's seat includes urban areas like Akron and Youngstown.

Due to their states swinging hard to Trump, it would be incredibly easy for the GOP machines in MI, OH, and PA to eliminate Dan Kildee's, Tim Ryan's, and Matthew Cartwright's districts in 2021. Sadly, a lot of those Obama-Trump voters aren't flipping back, ever. It would have been impossible for the GOP to have done this in 2011, though, as all of these states went for Obama easily.

Youngstown, Flint, Wilkes-Barre are sadly all fast-declining urban areas. That makes the positions of the Dems there even more precarious (except in Ohio, where it is likely nonpartisan redistricting will pass in 2018).

Trump voter=/=House R voter
It would be outrageously foolhardy to draw gerrymanders on that basis, generally. Also, it just screams 'dummymander' to me - Trump won many economically left-wing people in the Rust Belt and to assume they won't ever be won back on presidential level AND they would be reliable House Republican voters is just deeply unwise.

Tim, since when has a dummymander resulted from assuming the congressional vote will resemble the presidential vote, rather than from ignoring the presidential vote and assuming past congressional vote results will always remain? North Carolina has only three Dem districts, and it went for Trump by only four points. Ohio went for Trump by eight points. Surely Ohio can easily afford to lose OH-13 under a GOP gerrymander without it degenerating into a dummymander, and probably OH-09, as well. The majority of Obama-Trump voters were state legislative R voters if a seat was contested, and almost all Obama-Trump voters in GOP-held districts were House R voters.

I understand Romney vote is more strongly predictive of 2017 special election results than Trump vote. That's because presidential election results take time to fully percolate down to the local level. The Arkansas Democratic Party had plenty of fun during the 2000s winning Clinton 96/Bush 2000 voters. Then the 2010s came, and Bush 2000 results all of the sudden became far more predictive of congressional and state legislative vote than in 2006. Matt Cartwright, etc. will survive 2018 easily. But in the 2020s, the current PA-17 will very likely end up R on the House and state legislative level.

[I’m not Stu]

It is more difficult to eliminate a populated urban district than a rural district that is losing population. Some Obama-Trump voters live in urban districts that voted for Hillary Clinton and Tim Ryan. Who knows how they voted in House races?

[Nyvin]

OH: likely loses a GOP leaning district because rural districts are less populated.

That is incredibly terrible reasoning. Rural districts are just as populated as urban districts. Since Ohio went for Trump by eight points, it would be easy for the GOP to eliminate Tim Ryan's district if the GOP gerrymander stays. But that gerrymander probably won't stay due to the likely victory of an independent redistricting commission extension initiative in 2018.

RealClear Politics says it would be difficult to eliminate GOP seats in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan; maybe because rural populations are declining more quickly. Tim Ryan's seat includes urban areas like Akron and Youngstown.

Due to their states swinging hard to Trump, it would be incredibly easy for the GOP machines in MI, OH, and PA to eliminate Dan Kildee's, Tim Ryan's, and Matthew Cartwright's districts in 2021. Sadly, a lot of those Obama-Trump voters aren't flipping back, ever. It would have been impossible for the GOP to have done this in 2011, though, as all of these states went for Obama easily.

Youngstown, Flint, Wilkes-Barre are sadly all fast-declining urban areas. That makes the positions of the Dems there even more precarious (except in Ohio, where it is likely nonpartisan redistricting will pass in 2018).

Trump voter=/=House R voter
It would be outrageously foolhardy to draw gerrymanders on that basis, generally. Also, it just screams 'dummymander' to me - Trump won many economically left-wing people in the Rust Belt and to assume they won't ever be won back on presidential level AND they would be reliable House Republican voters is just deeply unwise.

Tim, since when has a dummymander resulted from assuming the congressional vote will resemble the presidential vote, rather than from ignoring the presidential vote and assuming past congressional vote results will always remain? North Carolina has only three Dem districts, and it went for Trump by only four points. Ohio went for Trump by eight points. Surely Ohio can easily afford to lose OH-13 under a GOP gerrymander without it degenerating into a dummymander, and probably OH-09, as well. The majority of Obama-Trump voters were state legislative R voters if a seat was contested, and almost all Obama-Trump voters in GOP-held districts were House R voters.

I understand Romney vote is more strongly predictive of 2017 special election results than Trump vote. That's because presidential election results take time to fully percolate down to the local level. The Arkansas Democratic Party had plenty of fun during the 2000s winning Clinton 96/Bush 2000 voters. Then the 2010s came, and Bush 2000 results all of the sudden became far more predictive of congressional and state legislative vote than in 2006. Matt Cartwright, etc. will survive 2018 easily. But in the 2020s, the current PA-17 will very likely end up R on the House and state legislative level.

They can either get rid of OH-13 or OH-9...not both.    Cleaveland and Akron are too large for just 1 dem vote sink.   OH-9 has a large part of it's population in western Cuyahoga.

But yes, OH-13 is the most likely to go, but the good news is both Cincinnati and Columbus are both looking good for the Democrats in the future

[This is Eharding, guys]

Hillary Clinton got just 418 more votes in OH-04 than Mitt Romney (who lost Ohio) got in OH-09 (and obviously fewer votes than Donald Trump or John McCain got in OH-09). If GOP machine is willing to risk it, and thinks Trump v. Clinton is the future, the current OH-09 and OH-04 can be transformed into two Obama-Trump districts.

Yes, Cincinnati is an obvious bright spot in the Ohio darkness.

[Roronoa D. Law]

OH: likely loses a GOP leaning district because rural districts are less populated.

That is incredibly terrible reasoning. Rural districts are just as populated as urban districts. Since Ohio went for Trump by eight points, it would be easy for the GOP to eliminate Tim Ryan's district if the GOP gerrymander stays. But that gerrymander probably won't stay due to the likely victory of an independent redistricting commission extension initiative in 2018.

RealClear Politics says it would be difficult to eliminate GOP seats in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan; maybe because rural populations are declining more quickly. Tim Ryan's seat includes urban areas like Akron and Youngstown.

Due to their states swinging hard to Trump, it would be incredibly easy for the GOP machines in MI, OH, and PA to eliminate Dan Kildee's, Tim Ryan's, and Matthew Cartwright's districts in 2021. Sadly, a lot of those Obama-Trump voters aren't flipping back, ever. It would have been impossible for the GOP to have done this in 2011, though, as all of these states went for Obama easily.

Youngstown, Flint, Wilkes-Barre are sadly all fast-declining urban areas. That makes the positions of the Dems there even more precarious (except in Ohio, where it is likely nonpartisan redistricting will pass in 2018).

Trump voter=/=House R voter
It would be outrageously foolhardy to draw gerrymanders on that basis, generally. Also, it just screams 'dummymander' to me - Trump won many economically left-wing people in the Rust Belt and to assume they won't ever be won back on presidential level AND they would be reliable House Republican voters is just deeply unwise.

Tim, since when has a dummymander resulted from assuming the congressional vote will resemble the presidential vote, rather than from ignoring the presidential vote and assuming past congressional vote results will always remain? North Carolina has only three Dem districts, and it went for Trump by only four points. Ohio went for Trump by eight points. Surely Ohio can easily afford to lose OH-13 under a GOP gerrymander without it degenerating into a dummymander, and probably OH-09, as well. The majority of Obama-Trump voters were state legislative R voters if a seat was contested, and almost all Obama-Trump voters in GOP-held districts were House R voters.

I understand Romney vote is more strongly predictive of 2017 special election results than Trump vote. That's because presidential election results take time to fully percolate down to the local level. The Arkansas Democratic Party had plenty of fun during the 2000s winning Clinton 96/Bush 2000 voters. Then the 2010s came, and Bush 2000 results all of the sudden became far more predictive of congressional and state legislative vote than in 2006. Matt Cartwright, etc. will survive 2018 easily. But in the 2020s, the current PA-17 will very likely end up R on the House and state legislative level.

They can either get rid of OH-13 or OH-9...not both.    Cleaveland and Akron are too large for just 1 dem vote sink.   OH-9 has a large part of it's population in western Cuyahoga.

But yes, OH-13 is the most likely to go, but the good news is both Cincinnati and Columbus are both looking good for the Democrats in the future

I don't think Democrat will ever get a Hamilton county seat.

[This is Eharding, guys]

Why not? It's urban and swung the most away from Trump of any Ohio county after Delaware.

[Roronoa D. Law]

Why not? It's urban and swung the most away from Trump of any Ohio county after Delaware.

Yeah but Cincinnati suburbs are still fairly Republican so they could easily split it among two district. Really depends on the outcome of Gill v. Whitford

[Brittain33]

Which district in West Virginia likely gets eliminated: Mooney's, Jenkins', or McKinley's?

By default, Mooney's (probably). It's sandwhiched between the other two CDs.

This is true, but I wonder what adding Kanawha county to the 3rd district will do the dynamics for party primaries in the new "2nd." While it's not that big (190,000 people) it's so much bigger than any other county in the state.

[Brittain33]

Tim, since when has a dummymander resulted from assuming the congressional vote will resemble the presidential vote, rather than from ignoring the presidential vote and assuming past congressional vote results will always remain?

Trump broke the blue wall by combining some Republican policies (opposition to immigration, discomfort with diversity) with many non-Republican policies (invest in infrastructure, no cuts to SS/Medicare/Medicaid, skeptical on trade) that put him more to the center. He swept up a lot of votes with these promises that the Congressional Rs have no interest in and he's breaking nearly all of them. After the GA-6 result, I think it's more likely that the new R voters in 2016 flip back to the Ds (or drop out of politics) than that good Clinton results in affluent districts mean 10+ Rs are going to lose their races in upscale suburban seats where Romney romped.

[krazen1211]

They can either get rid of OH-13 or OH-9...not both.    Cleaveland and Akron are too large for just 1 dem vote sink.   OH-9 has a large part of it's population in western Cuyahoga.

But yes, OH-13 is the most likely to go, but the good news is both Cincinnati and Columbus are both looking good for the Democrats in the future

Cuyahoga County Dems all can be shoved into 1 district in 2021 once the Akron leg is removed!

[windjammer]

Nclib NY has an indy commission

[100% pro-life no matter what]

I am really curious to see whether the TN GOP will split up Nashville between TN-4,5,6, and 7, which would still create four ~R+15 districts.  It's not particularly hard to do, so I bet some are wishing they had just gone ahead and done it in 2010-12.

[Strudelcutie4427]

Easy GOP gains
Shrink NH-1 away from Carroll/Belknap/Strafford and pick up Nashua suburbs and Salem

If Hogan has a say in MD, just do anything less ridiculous than that abortion of a map they have now

Slice up GA-2

Re-draw lines around Orlando, FL

Slice up TN-5

Slice up KY-3

If Rauner wins re election, eliminate the pie slices radiating out of Chicago

Crack MO-5 between 3 districts

Eliminate the Texas fajita strips, all of the Rio Grande delta can be held in 2 districts, add suburban GOP seats

They'll gain Oregon's 6th no matter what

[Gass3268]

Easy GOP gains
Shrink NH-1 away from Carroll/Belknap/Strafford and pick up Nashua suburbs and Salem

If Hogan has a say in MD, just do anything less ridiculous than that abortion of a map they have now

Slice up GA-2

Re-draw lines around Orlando, FL

Slice up TN-5

Slice up KY-3

If Rauner wins re election, eliminate the pie slices radiating out of Chicago

Crack MO-5 between 3 districts

Eliminate the Texas fajita strips, all of the Rio Grande delta can be held in 2 districts, add suburban GOP seats

They'll gain Oregon's 6th no matter what

Most of these would be either illegal or unlikely.

NH - Correct

MD - Only need 60% in MD to override a veto, Democrats are clearly over that threshold in both chambers.

GA - GA-02 is a protected VRA district, so that would be illegal.

FL - Would violate the state constitution.

TN - Correct

KY - State constitution requires whole counties, unless impossible.

IL - Correct

MO - Possible, but risky

Tx - Fajita strips are required by VRA, so illegal.

OR - Probably

[Strudelcutie4427]

Easy GOP gains
Shrink NH-1 away from Carroll/Belknap/Strafford and pick up Nashua suburbs and Salem

If Hogan has a say in MD, just do anything less ridiculous than that abortion of a map they have now

Slice up GA-2

Re-draw lines around Orlando, FL

Slice up TN-5

Slice up KY-3

If Rauner wins re election, eliminate the pie slices radiating out of Chicago

Crack MO-5 between 3 districts

Eliminate the Texas fajita strips, all of the Rio Grande delta can be held in 2 districts, add suburban GOP seats

They'll gain Oregon's 6th no matter what

Most of these would be either illegal or unlikely.

NH - Correct

MD - Only need 60% in MD to override a veto, Democrats are clearly over that threshold in both chambers.

GA - GA-02 is a protected VRA district, so that would be illegal.

FL - Would violate the state constitution.

TN - Correct

KY - State constitution requires whole counties, unless impossible.

IL - Correct

MO - Possible, but risky

Tx - Fajita strips are required by VRA, so illegal.

OR - Probably

Thank you. I'm kinda new to this and i really dont understand the state by state laws of how the VRA has to be applied exactly

[Heisenberg]

Easy GOP gains
Shrink NH-1 away from Carroll/Belknap/Strafford and pick up Nashua suburbs and Salem

If Hogan has a say in MD, just do anything less ridiculous than that abortion of a map they have now

Slice up GA-2

Re-draw lines around Orlando, FL

Slice up TN-5

Slice up KY-3

If Rauner wins re election, eliminate the pie slices radiating out of Chicago

Crack MO-5 between 3 districts

Eliminate the Texas fajita strips, all of the Rio Grande delta can be held in 2 districts, add suburban GOP seats

They'll gain Oregon's 6th no matter what

Most of these would be either illegal or unlikely.

NH - Correct

MD - Only need 60% in MD to override a veto, Democrats are clearly over that threshold in both chambers.

GA - GA-02 is a protected VRA district, so that would be illegal.

FL - Would violate the state constitution.

TN - Correct

KY - State constitution requires whole counties, unless impossible.

IL - Correct

MO - Possible, but risky

Tx - Fajita strips are required by VRA, so illegal.

OR - Probably

Thank you. I'm kinda new to this and i really dont understand the state by state laws of how the VRA has to be applied exactly

So, GA-02's VRA-protected status is why it had to be bumped to Black-majority in 2012? Then, maybe slice it up next decade, and turn GA-07 into an ATL VRA seat (and crack up the more anti-Trump and D-trending suburbs b/w GA-04, 05, 07, and 13? That would make four Georgia VRA seats. Or would GA-02 still need to be VRA even in that circumstance?
I think Jefferson County, KY is already too big to be kept whole in one CD, so it needs to be split into multiple districts (already has parts of KY-04 in it). And I agree, cracking MO-05 is super risky and almost certainly would backfire.

[I’m not Stu]

Ohio might get a redistricting commission passed in 2018.

[NOVA Green]

Actually drawing another Democratic district in Oregon is pretty easy. Oregon voted for Hillary by almost 11 points. OR-2 is a huge R vote sink. OR-4 is a very margin seat that Hillary won by like 0.1% (I think it might be the closest seat in the country) but has a strong incumbent and the Democrats could just boost it a bit by adding places like Ashland and Bend from OR-2 and shedding the Republican territory, and you have a seat that would be very hard to win for the Republicans even if DeFazio retires but would be about D+4 or so. That means in the remainder of Oregon Hillary would've won it by about 16-17 points, and thus could easily be chopped up so all the districts are at least in the teens margin of victory.

I'm not actually that convinced it would be easy to create another relatively Democratic district in Oregon given laws and precedents regarding how districts are created.

So let's start with the current population and then let's assume that population growth % by county/ cities within counties remains constant at 7/15-7/16 levels, and then let's annualize that growth rate out to 7/20.

The population of the State would be about 4,350,000 or roughly 725k per US-CD, assuming Oregon gains another House Seat.

The estimated population by County would look something like this:



Generally the rule in Oregon is that whenever possible, one needs to keep cities within one CD, try to observe county boundaries, especially for heavily rural counties, where the County seat is the center of government, and generally try to observe the whole concept "communities of interest". Additionally, you aren't supposed to be deliberately going and creating blatant partisan Gerrymandered districts.

So let's start with CD-02 as the "Republican Vote Sink"....

Basically the district is going to have to lose some real estate, that will have to end up elsewhere....

1.) You aren't going to be able to chop up Central Oregon (Crook/Deschuttes/Jefferson) without fundamentally separating well defined and understood communities of interest.... Trying to run a skinny district all the way out just to gobble up Bend likely wouldn't meet the Oregon criteria, unless you're also taking in large chunks of heavily Republican territory at the same time.

2.) So, this leaves us with 3 Counties and part of a 4th that are currently in CD-02, where we need to look to grab the extra 200k voters for the district. Hood River and Wasco in the far North could potentially be added into a district in Western Oregon, since there are some linkages between the bulk of the population along the Columbia River Gorge in Hood River and The Dalles and East Multnomah and Clackamas Counties.... The former is overwhelmingly Democratic, and the latter is an ancestral Democratic County with recent Republican leanings.  Then you have Jackson County in the South that has both some heavily Republican Areas, as well as some heavily Democratic communities. Either way the remainder of Josephine County (Grants Pass) will end up in CD-04 adding more Republican Votes.

3.) Jackson County will have to be split regardless, and if we need to give some back to CD-04, we may as well run a clean stretch over from Southern Josephine and grab Ashland, Phoenix, and Jacksonville, plus some Republican Rural areas along the Way....

4.) So now we can leave Wasco in CD-02 taking us up to 553k, meaning we need another 170k from Jackson, which conveniently happens to neatly take in the heavily Republican rural areas in the Eastern and Northern parts of the County as well as Medford.

5.) That should give us Hood River County to play with as part of district in the Portland Area, unless we want to keep it in reserve in case someone gets antsy about that being the only place East of the Cascades not in CD-02.

6.) CD-04--- So now we have a big problem, we've added some pretty solidly Dem turf from Ashland area, but we've also added some heavily Republican territory in Grants Pass, and out population is exceeding its limits. Fine--- let's get rid of the rest of Linn County and move that into another district, since part of it already is, and Mid-Valley areas are used to getting shifted around a little bit...

7.) So what to do with the rest of the State? Ok--- if you look at the population of the three core counties of Metro Portland, their combined population should account for about 1.9 Million by 2020 or 45% of the State Vote, not to mention some spare change from Exurbs around Newburg in Yamhill County. It's only fair that Metro Portland gets 3 CDs predominately located within the Metro area, and another CD that is predominately located in the Mid-Valley.

8.) How to "stretch" the Metro Portland vote in a way the dilutes the strong Democratic Votes, while simultaneously respecting precedent?

9.) It makes sense to split Multnomah into two halves--- West of the Willamette and East of the Willamette. This has been done before, and plus you have a County that will have somewhere around 850k people that will need to be split regardless.

10.) CD-03 would retain all of MultCo East of the River, which would give it a base of about 676k Population. To take the other 45k you would probably need to take in the existing Exurban parts of Clackamas already in the district (Happy Valley, Sandy, Estacada), but you're running out of population, and would need to move some heavily Republican rural areas into CD-05, in what is already a marginal district. I guess you might be able to offset by moving some of the Republican leaning exurbs above into CD-05 instead, but either way....

11.) CD-01 would have West Multnomah (170k), Columbia, Clatsop (92k), Tillamook (27k) for a base of 289k, leaving us with another 436k population.... Well this is pretty much all going to come out of Washington County, so we may as well take all of the rural areas, places like Forest Grove and such, throw in fast-growing Hillsboro (110k), a bunch of unincorporated areas West of Portland, etc

12.) CD-06--- Thinking Tigard and Beaverton would be the base (160k) along with another 42k in the SW portion of the County for 202k in Washington.... Add in Yamhill, Polk, Benton, and Lincoln and you have another 342k for 544k to date.... we still need another 200k Pop. I guess you could throw Linn County into the Mix and some rural parts of Marion.

13.) CD-05--- Would keep existing Democratic suburbs of Milwaukee, Lake Oswego, Gladstone, West Linn, and Uninc Areas around there, throw in Salem-Keizer, Woodborn, and all of the rural areas in Marion along the I-5 corridor, and you're still maintaining much of the district.

Here's a crude map of what that would look like--- haven't run the '16 GE Pres precinct numbers against this, but it looks like you would end up with a potential 5-1 Dem Congressional Delegation, albeit with 2 reachable Republican flip seats (CD-05 and CD-06), assuming that letting go of Linn combined with Ashland overpowering Grants Pass strengthens CD-04.

[jimrtex]

Eliminate the Texas fajita strips, all of the Rio Grande delta can be held in 2 districts, add suburban GOP seats

Tx - Fajita strips are required by VRA, so illegal.

They are not compact and split communities of interest. The only explanation for them is to assign persons to electoral districts on the basis of race.

[Nyvin]

Easy GOP gains
Shrink NH-1 away from Carroll/Belknap/Strafford and pick up Nashua suburbs and Salem

If Hogan has a say in MD, just do anything less ridiculous than that abortion of a map they have now

Slice up GA-2

Re-draw lines around Orlando, FL

Slice up TN-5

Slice up KY-3

If Rauner wins re election, eliminate the pie slices radiating out of Chicago

Crack MO-5 between 3 districts

Eliminate the Texas fajita strips, all of the Rio Grande delta can be held in 2 districts, add suburban GOP seats

They'll gain Oregon's 6th no matter what

I don't think the NH GOP would be all for making NH-1 more GOP since that in turn would make NH-2 less competitive.   They probably want to keep both at least somewhat obtainable.   They did draw the districts how they are now in 2011.   Plus taking out the "Dem" parts of Strafford is near impossible, unless you completely bacon-strip the hell out of the district.  

TN-5, MO-5 and most likely OR-6 are probably going to the GOP though if they're free to gerrymander the map (OR-6 due to OR-4 and OR-5 moving north and becoming more Dem, thus leaving the southwest as a GOP district).

They will need to be careful about MO-5 though.

[Gass3268]

Easy GOP gains
Shrink NH-1 away from Carroll/Belknap/Strafford and pick up Nashua suburbs and Salem

If Hogan has a say in MD, just do anything less ridiculous than that abortion of a map they have now

Slice up GA-2

Re-draw lines around Orlando, FL

Slice up TN-5

Slice up KY-3

If Rauner wins re election, eliminate the pie slices radiating out of Chicago

Crack MO-5 between 3 districts

Eliminate the Texas fajita strips, all of the Rio Grande delta can be held in 2 districts, add suburban GOP seats

They'll gain Oregon's 6th no matter what

Most of these would be either illegal or unlikely.

NH - Correct

MD - Only need 60% in MD to override a veto, Democrats are clearly over that threshold in both chambers.

GA - GA-02 is a protected VRA district, so that would be illegal.

FL - Would violate the state constitution.

TN - Correct

KY - State constitution requires whole counties, unless impossible.

IL - Correct

MO - Possible, but risky

Tx - Fajita strips are required by VRA, so illegal.

OR - Probably

Thank you. I'm kinda new to this and i really dont understand the state by state laws of how the VRA has to be applied exactly

So, GA-02's VRA-protected status is why it had to be bumped to Black-majority in 2012? Then, maybe slice it up next decade, and turn GA-07 into an ATL VRA seat (and crack up the more anti-Trump and D-trending suburbs b/w GA-04, 05, 07, and 13? That would make four Georgia VRA seats. Or would GA-02 still need to be VRA even in that circumstance?
I think Jefferson County, KY is already too big to be kept whole in one CD, so it needs to be split into multiple districts (already has parts of KY-04 in it). And I agree, cracking MO-05 is super risky and almost certainly would backfire.

Yeah, GA-02 will be interesting. Getting rid of it would probably open up the state to a court case. Dividing up Jefferson County other than a rump district that makes up most of the county with another coming in to get the reminder would also open the state up to a court case

Eliminate the Texas fajita strips, all of the Rio Grande delta can be held in 2 districts, add suburban GOP seats

Tx - Fajita strips are required by VRA, so illegal.

They are not compact and split communities of interest. The only explanation for them is to assign persons to electoral districts on the basis of race.

Every court ruling has mandated the fajita strips as being required by the VRA. If anything it looks like another strip or two will be added by the courts.

[krazen1211]

Thank you. I'm kinda new to this and i really dont understand the state by state laws of how the VRA has to be applied exactly

The Trumpification of the courts is going to have a big impact. Wouldn't be surprising to see Neil Gorsuch toss this silly Voting Rights Act into history's dustbin.

[Strudelcutie4427]

Thank you. I'm kinda new to this and i really dont understand the state by state laws of how the VRA has to be applied exactly

The Trumpification of the courts is going to have a big impact. Wouldn't be surprising to see Neil Gorsuch toss this silly Voting Rights Act into history's dustbin.

Should be simple. Equal protection under the law means everyone should be treated the same. No special treatment for certain groups. we should have 435 American districts, not a set number of white, black, asian, hispanic seats. Just American