In NM-2, Will Wilson be Redistricted?

[jimrtex]

Of course parts of the frostrocity were preserved in the court map - though not the worst gerrymanders. (One element that survived were the "bacon strips"... but these got even worse under DeLay. And I'm not even sure if they originated in the Frostrocity or whether they're even older.) Also, remember that the map in place immediately before 2002 was not the full Frostrocity anymore, as parts of it had been thrown out by a court (the same court? I'm not quite sure) before, just as has now happened to DeLay's map.

The Frostrocity was originally challenged as a partisan gerrymander.  When it was eventually overturned, it was in part due to the original defense - that district lines had been drawn for racial purposes, rather than partisan purposes.  The districts were originally overturned by the federal district court (South Texas), and there would have been time for a legislative remedy, but the legislature mucked around and waited for the Supreme Court to uphold the decision.  By that time, it was already into 1996 and the court went ahead and imposed its districts and the do-over elections.  It also directed the legislature to finish cleaning up the boundaries for the 1998 election (which it failed to do).

In 2001, the Democrats sought out the federal district court in (East Texas), filing before the legislature even had a chance to act or not act.  The court described the existing boundaries as "patently bizarre" even after the 1996 changes (see District 6 for an example).

The federal district court upheld the districts drawn by the 2003 legislature.  The reason that the changes were made last summer was that the US Supreme Court couldn't decide whether to take the case, and eventually kicked it back to the district court to consider whether a USSC decision made after the district court had considered the case should apply.  The district court once again upheld the legislative plan, and it wasn't until 2006 that the USSC finally ruled against Bonilla's district.

[jimrtex]

Wow, what a stupid argument. Bush got 59% because IT WAS HIS HOME STATE.  It was the Republicans own damn fault if they couldn't defeat Democrats like Charles Stenholm who won in a 72.2% Bush district.

In 2000, Republican congressional candidates received 55% of the vote, and elected 12 of 30 representatives.  In 2002, this improved to 14 of 32.

[minionofmidas]

Right, he was forced to move to that district because everywhere else in the Austin area was drawn into solidly Republican districts. That of course is a predominately Hispanic district that will be virtually impossible to be held by an Anglo Democrat once Doggett retires. If everywhere in the Austin area is in a Republican district except the Hispanic part, that's rather gerrymandered.

Not to mention that district itself is a gerrymandered atrocity.

He wasn't supposed to be in congress after 2004 - in fact, that would seem to be the whole point of the map there.
Of course, that district got redrawn by the court, and Doggett now represents a white-majority district again (that I'm not sure how democratic it is in presidential elections, actually.)

[minionofmidas]

Wow, what a stupid argument. Bush got 59% because IT WAS HIS HOME STATE.  It was the Republicans own damn fault if they couldn't defeat Democrats like Charles Stenholm who won in a 72.2% Bush district.

In 2000, Republican congressional candidates received 55% of the vote, and elected 12 of 30 representatives.  In 2002, this improved to 14 of 32.

13 and 15, actually, or 14 and 16 when you count Hall as a Republican.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Wow, what a stupid argument. Bush got 59% because IT WAS HIS HOME STATE.  It was the Republicans own damn fault if they couldn't defeat Democrats like Charles Stenholm who won in a 72.2% Bush district.

In 2000, Republican congressional candidates received 55% of the vote, and elected 12 of 30 representatives.  In 2002, this improved to 14 of 32.

Interestingly enough, this is basically the argument Fernie used the other day to defend gerrymandering Wilson out of her seat.

[WMS]

Yep, WMS, it ain't viewable in Firefox.  Unfortunately, you have to use old IE to get it to work properly.

I should really add that NM-03 really isn't that "safe Dem" of a seat (look at 2000 and 2004 numbers against the spread).  Dems just have a fairly strong incumbent there right now and a GOP who refuses to run anyone worth mentioning against him.

Besides, NM voters are very unpredictable, especially where WMS is.  You can't expect them to give you the results you want just because you gerrymander it to be so.  Those aren't typical hyper-GOP suburbs or hyper-Dem urban areas.

Grr. Bah. IE.

Yes, I noticed that about NM-3 as well - your explanation is quite right (and a warning about adding up the Congressional votes to figure out partisan percentages).

Nope, lots of unpredictable metro-area voters

I've thought about it and here's what I would have gone for as a Democratic legislator in 2002, ie a map that looks decent and addresses some legitimate issues, while also tweaked somewhat to favor Dems:

(Nate's attempt, reposted for reference)




Basically a Bernalillo-Valencia district with the Indian rez.s in the far west of Bernalillo and some Republican territory towards the North of Albuquerque missing, and certainly not going into Sandoval, but with East Bernalillo County in; and the border between the two outer districts exactly where Nate put it.

Mine is better.

OK, I picked Rio Rancho because it is a bit more directly connected with Albuquerque than Los Lunas/Belen/etc. after all, the two cities share a border and impact each other a lot. And your map is fairly close to the 1981-1991 attempts to shape the district for Dem advantage. Of course, the Dems really went all-out in 2001 with the pinwheel districts...which shows they weren't being very smart that time around.

The outer borders are good, yes they are.

Wow, what a stupid argument. Bush got 59% because IT WAS HIS HOME STATE.  It was the Republicans own damn fault if they couldn't defeat Democrats like Charles Stenholm who won in a 72.2% Bush district.

In 2000, Republican congressional candidates received 55% of the vote, and elected 12 of 30 representatives.  In 2002, this improved to 14 of 32.

Interestingly enough, this is basically the argument Fernie used the other day to defend gerrymandering Wilson out of her seat.

You can't make up these moments.

[jimrtex]

He wasn't supposed to be in congress after 2004 - in fact, that would seem to be the whole point of the map there.

It was to provide a district where Hispanics could choose a candidate of their choice.

[jimrtex]

In 2000, Republican congressional candidates received 55% of the vote, and elected 12 of 30 representatives.  In 2002, this improved to 14 of 32.

13 and 15, actually, or 14 and 16 when you count Hall as a Republican.

If you count Hall as a Republican, then you have to count his votes as Republican votes, which also increases the 55%.

[minionofmidas]

In 2000, Republican congressional candidates received 55% of the vote, and elected 12 of 30 representatives.  In 2002, this improved to 14 of 32.

13 and 15, actually, or 14 and 16 when you count Hall as a Republican.

If you count Hall as a Republican, then you have to count his votes as Republican votes, which also increases the 55%.

Yes... (no, actually. It's far more complex. Let's just settle on counting him as a Democrat.) Hall just got thrown into this post because I was trying to figure out where you miscounted.