US House Redistricting: California

[Torie]

CA-46 and CA-47 are now done. Again, I think this is how the map will probably actually be drawn. CA-42 and CA-40 are works in progress. Both are still short of population by about 40,000 and 30,000 thousand folks, respectively. CA-40 will probably pick up Naples and Belmont Heights and Shore in Long Beach to round it out. It is a community of interest reasonably tied to Seal Beach in OC. We shall see. If CA-40 stays all in OC, it will have to split Fullerton, and under the law County lines do not trump municipal lines (both are given equal weight), so I see no reason to do that. CA-42 may be subject to more substantial changes.

Under the CA law, one needs a very good reason to split municipalities, so I was careful to minimize doing that. So Anaheim and Garden Grove were split (they have to be, but Anaheim only on the east, excising Anaheim Hills), and CA-47 picked up a few Hispanic precincts in Fullerton and Costa Mesa, and a couple from Orange that stick awkwardly across the 5 Fwy anyway) -  all justified by the VRA. The Vietnamese in Garden Grove were excised from CA-47, so Loretta Sanchez does not need to worry about them anymore. CA-46 is Lake Forest, Irvine, Tustin, Laguna Beach, Laguna Woods, a bit of Laguna Hills otherwise largely cut off from where most of it is in CA-48, Newport Beach, most of Costa Mesa, and Fountain Valley.

The shape and location of CA-47 kind of drives what else is going on in OC.

[Torie]

What is the Hispanic % in Ca-47?

70.3%, presumably VAP if VAP figures have been imputed for all states. Muon2 mentioned that he told Dave Bradlee that VAP was what mattered legally, Bradlee made the change.

[Torie]

Here is the Long Beach extension round out of CA-40. It worked quite well in picking up what is a quite cohesive community, and what you are looking it is what I consider the coolest and most desirable place to live in Socal really, if it is within commuting distance of your work (but now the trolley runs from close to there right up to downtown LA). The tastefully landscaped and maintained housing nestled next to the beach (check out the beach volleyball games which go on all the time on the weekends, and the buffed bods of those leaping a around  trying to get to and slam back the ball), and the bay, and the lagoons, and the channels and the boats, is all there just waiting for you to enjoy.

You can walk to 2nd street with its sidewalk cafes and other interesting shops (my favorite dispensary is on 2nd street), and people watch (sipping a morning cappuccino), and trust me, the people that you are watching are well worth watching. The area has a substantial gay minority - those who can afford it. If you are in the area, check out 2nd street and the hood. I suspect that you won't be disappointed. And to the west along the streets near the bay for a couple or three miles, is a lot of older construction, and some splendid and well maintained craftsman homes, and 1920's colonials and so forth. Downtown Long Beach has also made a big comeback. I just love the area.

And oh yes, the climate is great because this part of the CA coastline has a southern exposure which is rather protected (by the Palos Verdes Hills, which tend to block off some of the fog to its east along the coast), so you get the cooler temps (and cleaner air) of beach living without as much of the fog. It's one of the sunniest beach locals in all of Socal.

[Torie]

Since the official data aren't out yet and you'll have to redo once they are... I'd put this on hold for now.

Have there been substantial discrepancies between the town estimates that became available about 6 weeks ago, and the final census numbers in other states with finalized numbers to your knowledge?  If so, yes, you are right. The only thing, is the county numbers are final, so the overall shape of what I drew so far will still hold (SD and OC counties basically, with the Hispanic CD in Riverside County that kind of draws itself, and can expand or contract a bit, and one other CD wedged in the SW corner of Riverside, which can easily expand or contract a bit). But starting to do LA County would indeed be insane, if the numbers are going to move much, I agree.

[Torie]

Bearing in mind what cinyc suggested in a nice way, that I may just be jacking off with no real consummation (I hate when that happens), here psephology fans is a really quite interesting development.

Can you discern where this is going? CA-42 becomes in essence an Anglo sink, and picks off the most Anglo precincts within reach in Riverside and San Bernadino Counties. All the middle to upper middle class Riverside precincts where the old Riverside bourgeoise live have been picked off and dumped into CA-42 along with the Anglo middle class precincts in Corona (connected by the main arterial between OC and Riverside County), housing Anglos with kids whose desperation for more housing square footage in a zip code with somewhat acceptable public schools, drives them out of OC and into Corona, often giving daddy a miserable commute back into OC along that Fwy arterial that is often as clogged as an old man who ate a lot of fatty meat all his life).

So CA-44 is now 52% Hispanic VAP. That makes it a marginal CD I suspect all things being equal, maybe with a Dem lean. It certainly isn't a CD that Calvert can hold. Yes, the bourgeoise Anglos are not in it, but Anglos in this neck of the woods are pretty conservative in general irrespective of income. Their neighborhoods are browning out, they feel screwed, and are not very happy.

So I am giving the Dems a half point, making the GOP net body count now one. Bono is gone, Calvert's pubbie replacement candidate is bifurcated (if Calvert is the GOP nominee, then it is Dem plus 1 rather than .5), but that Anglo city of San Diego CD which used to be Dem is now marginal I suspect, so minus a half bod for the Dems there, so 1 +.5 + -.5 = 1 net dead Pubbie.

And it does look like I can now map an Asian CD in LA County without screwing anybody else - except Anglos - and I fully suspect the Calif commission will do exactly that. Again the map is sort of drawing itself. CA-41 has the right population (I made it go up the Owens Valley all the way to and including Alpine County because the Sierra Nevadas are a wall that I am sure the commission will respect. But where its boundaries are vis a vis Hispanic CA-43  and the other two CD's to the west of it (Drier's and that Mormon guy who represents the Antelope Valley and other hideous places), remain to be seen). And CA-45 and CA-44 might exchange a few precincts to make it look prettier, but not if it makes CA-45 much less Hispanic, and I need to be careful if I split Moreno Valley, to have a good justification for it.

Addendum: It occurs to me that I could dump the far eastern Anglo precincts in CA-44 (20 or so maybe) into San Bernadino County based CA-41, and have CA-44 replace them with some Hispanic precincts from overpopulated San Bernadino Hispanic CA-43, making CA-44 a bit more Hispanic, pushing it closer to being out of reach of the GOP.

This is kind of fun. I have become a specialist in screwing Dems, but now ...

[Torie]

I highly doubt you need to make Riverside so damn ugly just to eek out an Asian district in LA. Put the eastern appendage of CA-44 into CA-41. It is basically the same sort of area as CA-41, is adjacent to the bulk of it's population, and just down the road on I-10. Then add the eastern appendage of CA-42 which is in Riverside, to CA-44 as required to get enough population. Or you can't because you think CA-44 will be mandated to be a Hispanic district? I would wait on doing this till the official data is put up. Hopefully it's soon.

An Asian influence district is enough in LA I would think. You don't need that extention into Hacienda Heights through to Diamond Bar. Just the Rosemead to Arcadia area is enough.

Well I noted above that the eastern leg of CA-44 is probably going to be added to CA-41, and CA-44 will pick up some nearby Hispanic precincts in San Bernadino County. That will probably push the Hispanic percentage up to 54% or something, and yes, the CD is probably required under the VRA (it clearly is a community of interest, and a rather compact and contiguous one to boot), and in all events the commission (I think about two thirds of its members are something other than Anglo by the way), and the Hispanic political community, will demand it. Every Hispanic CD that can be drawn, will be drawn, unless and until such time as they get a percentage share of the CD's that about equals their share of California's population. I doubt if it is really possible to hit that number by the way, so there isn't much danger of max out.

The Asian CD is pretty easy to defend (just zip east on the Pomona Fwy, and it is Asian almost continually along it, and it really has a nice geographic niche between the Anglo world and the Hispanic world. In short, it's a community of interest, far more than anything else that could be done. I think the commission will in fact draw it. This map exercise is a prediction of what will happen, not what I or anyone else want to happen. That is the way I play this game. What would I do, if whomever had the power to draw the lines, asked me to mouse it out as they agent? That is the only way to make this game fun, and in fact, to try to actually interject oneself in the drawing games with the powers that be (or dump on them if somebody is doing something self serving and dumb). The rest is just masturbation in my world.

[Torie]

Why are you so sure they will draw that appendage though? Why not just add Pasadena and other areas closer by instead? And why are you so sure they won't do that? That they won't just be satisfied with a 30% Asian district. And it's not even as if Asians are a monolithic group, so I really wouldn't be so sure it will happen. Don't the Chinese near Monterey Park and surroundings tend to be from the mainland while I know for a fact that Rowland Heights and Hacienda Heights is a heavily Taiwanese community.

They get along fine, and all speak Mandarin. Pasadena is Asian light for some reason. Anglos really like to live in Pasadena now. We shall see how it plays out, when the final population numbers come out. I am not going to do anymore CA drawing, until the final numbers are imputed into Bradlee's software. The issue is always whether or not doing one thing, causes a problem elsewhere or not, which can be due to a variety of factors.  And where should Diamond Bar and Hacienda Heights go anyway? One possibility is a grab bag CD running along the Orange County line perhaps, right up from Belmont Heights in Long Beach to Diamond Bar. But somehow I doubt that will happen. Another is adding it to Drier's CD, but we shall see whether he "needs it" or not.

Are you concerned that my little extension might make the Asian CD too GOP?  The Commission is not supposed to worry about such mundane matters.

[Torie]

Looking at the San Diego part of your map, I have no idea why you seem to think you have eliminated a Dem CD there, Torie. Explain?

The Anglo city of San Diego CD looks marginal to me, that's why. So the Dems lose half a point. We shall see what the PVI is, when the partisan numbers become available, but that is my guess. Yes, it could also be a weak Dem CD, with maybe a Dem PVI of 2 or 3. We shall see.

[Torie]

Don't worry, be happy, sbane. Putting aside the Asian extension, it will all look quite pretty in the end. CD-44 will be quite compact I think. Again, the point is to try to figure out what the commission will do in the end. The rest is noise. Now if Diamond Bar Chinese Asians make it clear in the hearings that they don't want to be associated with those Chinese Asian jerks in South Pasadena, or the snobs in San Marino, or the rather clannish Monterey Park crew, that of course could make a difference. But somehow I doubt that will happen.

As to CA-42, it may look a bit ugly, but it is a community of interest far more than if it included Diamond Bar. Folks go back and forth to work and to shop and whatnot from the OC CA-42 zone to the CA-42 Riverside zone all the time through that FWY pass (I think it's the 91). And those transportation patterns are specifically mentioned in the governing statute. I am quite confident that CA-42 will be drawn that way, unless it creates some other problem elsewhere.

[Torie]

Looking at the San Diego part of your map, I have no idea why you seem to think you have eliminated a Dem CD there, Torie. Explain?

The Anglo city of San Diego CD looks marginal to me, that's why. So the Dems lose half a point. We shall see what the PVI is, when the partisan numbers become available, but that is my guess. Yes, it could also be a weak Dem CD, with maybe a Dem PVI of 2 or 3. We shall see.

I don't see why. You barely changed the current CA-53, just dropped Lemon Grove and added some marginal areas to the north. True, that will drop the PVI slightly, but I would be somewhat surprised if your CA-53 were under D+10. (The current one is D+14.)

There are a lot of liberal Anglos in the city of San Diego. After all, the current CA-53 is 51% non-Hispanic white and 68% Obama.

The partisan numbers are what they are, but my CA-53 is 65% Anglo (probably the most Anglo CD in Socal, with the possible exception of whatever "Hollyweird" CD is drawn), rather than 51%. The old version (having just looked at it) looks to me like a Dem gerrymander more or less (its erose lines on the northern edges are there for a reason, and that reason was that this CD in the deal the parties cut, was to be Dem). The new one isn't.   In any event, I wonder what the Bush 2004 numbers were as well. Like CA-48, I suspect there was a huge swing to Obama, which as you probably know, included yours truly.

[Torie]

Looking at the San Diego part of your map, I have no idea why you seem to think you have eliminated a Dem CD there, Torie. Explain?

The Anglo city of San Diego CD looks marginal to me, that's why. So the Dems lose half a point. We shall see what the PVI is, when the partisan numbers become available, but that is my guess. Yes, it could also be a weak Dem CD, with maybe a Dem PVI of 2 or 3. We shall see.

I don't see why. You barely changed the current CA-53, just dropped Lemon Grove and added some marginal areas to the north. True, that will drop the PVI slightly, but I would be somewhat surprised if your CA-53 were under D+10. (The current one is D+14.)

There are a lot of liberal Anglos in the city of San Diego. After all, the current CA-53 is 51% non-Hispanic white and 68% Obama.

I tried to draw it approximately how Torie drew it, and it came out to be about 63% Obama.

How do you figure that out, sbane? It would be very laborious (probably take at least three hours, and that assumes that the precinct returns can be slapped on your excel spreadsheet in tabular form, so you can use the data sort function), unless you found some utility that did it automatically. Is there a Dave Bradlee utility that I missed somewhere?

[Torie]

OK Verily. Just how the Commission will draw CD-53 at the northern edges is an open question. Plus I have some northern bits of the city of San Diego split between the two CD's to the north, CA-50 and 52. It is a bit of a mess. The final population numbers therefore might make a difference, and it is possible that CA-50 might take in La Jolla/UCSD (it has Del Mar and Solana Beach which are closely tied to it), and CA-53 take in some more inland territory. But Escondido will still be in CA-50 I would think, and I suspect the commission is more likely than not, not to do that, but we shall see.

[Torie]

OK sbane and verily, my CA-53 is 61.1% Obama, with a Dem PVI of 8.53% (because it is 62.2% Obama of the two party vote, which is the way I calculate the baselines, just using the two party splits and ignoring 3rd party votes). So the Dems don't lose any partial points for this CD. Isn't it fun to show up the old man?

[Torie]

CA-18 and 20 are both majority-Hispanic, according to the new Census figures, so they should be protected by the VRA.

The 20th has been; it was 63.1% Hispanic according to 2000 numbers. The 18th is majority-Hispanic now, barely, but almost certainly not majority-Hispanic by VAP so it wouldn't be protected.

It will if it can be adjusted up to 50% Hispanic VAP within a community of interest zone.

[Torie]

These maps look very odd to me, almost shocking. What on earth are they doing?

[Torie]

Can someone explain the changes in San Diego? Where do they leave Susan Davis and does someone get a new district?

EDIT: thanks to the link above, it looks like Bilbray and Issa are in a primary and a new Republican district was created that covers the south coast.

Nah the south coast CD is mine, and seems to have been drawn to make it have the highest median income possible. 

It's CA-48, the John Campbell CD.

[Torie]

Sanchez's district is almost certain to change since the Hispanic VAP isn't majority. As for Capps, her district is the same one she won three times before and the area has grown more Democratic than it was back then, so she's fine there.

I wonder how that will survive a VRA challenge. It is easy to create a majority VAP Hispanic CD with what is clearly a cohesive community of interest.

[Torie]

You can't create a majority VAP Asian CD in Orange County, so no other minority group would be a collateral screwee. But you can in LA County, and they did, which I consider appropriate.

[Torie]

You can't create a majority VAP Asian CD in Orange County, so no other minority group would be a collateral screwee. But you can in LA County, and they did, which I consider appropriate.

Once you start talking about the VRA, doesn't the concept of county lines fall out the window?  Even if it doesn't, you could create a CD in Orange County that would be more likely to elect the candidate the Asians in the area prefer.

To me, a truly competitive district where either group could elect the candidate of their choice should suffice.  The district is 53.4% Hispanic, anyway, albeit a few points lower than that in VAP (48.1%).  Hispanic CVAP percentage is much lower still (31.8%) - likely reflecting a large illegal alien population which can't legally elect anyone.

Well, you are now talking about the VRA not comporting with good  public policy, and on that one, you may have noticed that I called for the VRA's repeal.

[Torie]

The San Diego county CD's are quite interesting. It will be interesting to see the partisan stats. The Sanchez CD in OC needed to be redrawn to comport with the voting rights act. The Beach cities CD in LA County was totally redrawn in a way that totally shuts the Pubbies out. It goes all the way to Hancock Park now. Has a competitive CD been drawn in the Bay area? One looks like it might be a candidate.

[Torie]

The district that wraps around the SD Hispanic district is about 62% Obama and also 56% Jerry Brown. The Poway to Coronado district is about 56% Obama but voted for Whitman by 54-45. Now that district will most certainly have very interesting elections. The other one which will likely have very interesting elections is the Ventura County district. It voted 57% Obama and was 50-50 in the governor's race. The SLO-Santa Barbara district also has similar partisan stats.

The beach cities district not containing Torrance is weird. Definitely shuts out the Pubbies there. And which Bay Area district looks competitive to you? Neither of those two inland East Bay districts are competitive. One picks up Richmond and the other picks up Hayward. If an exclusive inland East Bay district was drawn, it could have been competitive, especially in good years for the Republicans.

I was thinking of the CD to the right, but now I see with more magnification, that it has way too much of San Jose (and the downscale part to boot), to be competitive. However, the one to the left looks like it has a very high SES, very high. I wonder what it's partisan stats are. From where are you getting your partisan stats by the way sbane?  The Riverside city CD also looks like it might be marginal to lean Dem. The stats on that would be interesting too.

[Torie]

So which district would Cardoza run in? The new San Joaquin County one?

Wait, the coastal district now stretches all the way from Palos Verdes to Malibu?

It is bad for Hahn.

Hahn doesn't live in that district anymore. She can run in the new 44th or the coastal district. But as you say, that is not where she is strong. Waxman should move and represent the coastal district. He's perfect for it.

Waxman may be a bit left for that CD. It has a very high income. That prong heading to Hancock Park and Larchmont Village is very bourgeoise. However, he does have good Hollywood connections. I wonder what its partisan stats are. 60% Obama?

One theme of the map overall it seems to me, is that it is very SES based. It is almost as if certain districts were drawn to maximize their median income. The CD that Silverlake was put in, for example, is part of another quite high income CD, that takes in Los Feliz, and then a very high income bit of Pasadena, and wealthy La Canada/Flintridge,  along with middle class (overall) Glendale and a bit of Burbank, and La Crescenta, and so forth. These CD's 40 years ago would have been Pubbie!    My little CD hugging the coast of Orange County is probably one of the most wealthy in the nation.

It will be interesting to see if the Dems representing the these high income CD's tack a bit and become a bit more moderate on fiscal issues.

[Torie]

So the Pubbies lose 4 safe seats in Socal (Drier, Miller, Calvert and Galleghly (sp), and get in exchange two tossup seats (one in the San Gabriel Valley, and one in Ventura county), with the lean GOP CD in San Diego (Bilbray), made slightly more Dem, and now a tossup CD.  The Santa Barbara seat (Capps) goes from safe Dem to tossup. Have I got this about right?

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, what I "saw" was mere text. It was probably put up by some Pubbie hack however, so probably I was foolish to pay it any mind.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Torie]

Does anyone think the new 47th CD will become competitive? The commission drew it to include all of Long Beach, but it also includes the wealthy areas of Belmont, Naples, and Bixby Knolls, Los Alamitos (known for its military community), Cypress, Republican leaning parts of Garden Grove, and most of the Republican stronghold of Westminster. Plus Republicans recruited a top tier candidate in Gary DeLong who is a Long Beach Councilman.

Long Beach is  very Dem, including the wealthier bits (maybe less so Bixby Knolls, which is one or two precincts), and other than the Vietnamese community, not much of a Pubbie offset per your description. Since Long Beach is four times the size of the Vietnamese community, the Dem PVI must be up there, like 6% minimum, maybe more. So no, per your description of the district, absent a big gap in candidate quality, and another GOP wave of some sort.