US House Redistricting: Kansas
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 09:04:27 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  US House Redistricting: Kansas
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: Kansas  (Read 26913 times)
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #125 on: May 03, 2012, 04:26:15 PM »
« edited: May 03, 2012, 09:20:41 PM by Torie »

The state senate committee on redistricting on a voice vote "without dissent," approved the map below yesterday, and it now goes to the floor.  It of course does not serve Pub interests, and kind of blows as a map qua map in any event. The prior Senate map was much better from a non partisan good mapping standpoint. Rather than this excrescence, where KS-01 roots around Topeka and Manhattan to pick up residents, instead go down to Pittsburg for heavens sake at least (see map at bottom). (The McCain-Obama vote in KS-02 is a pedestrian and enervating 51.6% McCain, 46.5% Obama.) And now the State Senate Pubs have managed to max Dem strength in KS-03 as well. Congratulations guys. You suck.



Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #126 on: May 03, 2012, 04:46:11 PM »

The state senate committee on redistricting on a voice vote "without dissent," approved the map below yesterday, and it now goes to the floor.  It of course does not serve Pub interests, and kind of blows as a map qua map in any event. The prior Senate map was much better from a non partisan good mapping standpoint. Rather than this excrescence, where KS-01 roots around Topeka and Manhattan to pick up residents, instead go down to Pittsburg for heavens sake at least (see map at bottom). (The McCain-Obama vote in KS-02 is a pedestrian and enervating 51.6% McCain, 46.5% Obama.) And now the State Senate Pubs have managed to max Dem strength in KS-03 as well. Congratulations guys. You suck.





This is what happens when you let the majority-party incumbents call the shots. They tend to look after narrow interests which are good for neither the public or the party. Tongue Tongue

Is the House likely to go with this as well?
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #127 on: May 03, 2012, 04:59:57 PM »
« Edited: May 03, 2012, 05:08:59 PM by Torie »

I  have no idea if the House will go for this sick puppy, or whether it will pass on the floor of the Senate. Our map looks like shear inspired genius compared to this thing, although part of "this thing" appears admittedly to have been a least change thing, but rather demonically, the map seems to have CA-01 suck up CA-02's most GOP counties, where there are a bit more Dem ones hanging like ripe low hanging fruit to pluck.

In other news, I have not forgotten CA, but was brooding about the 0.5% thing not counting as a chop where you have to minimize chops because that demands the micro chops, which leads straight into your little regional map thing (yes, I may have been born at night, but not last night  Tongue). But I think there may be a procedural fix and way out here (which also affords some additional protection for dial it in or false flag Pubs on the Commission). You have staff draw up all the micro chop options, and while one of those maps can be picked in the normal way, to go with a map that ditches the micro chops for bigger chops, requires a supra majority. That way, say 4 out of 5 from each party will have to agree before the micro chop maps are ditched. I also want an out for any sized chop which avoids a chop of some magnitude of a metro area over a certain size I think (e.g., I want to do say a 25% chop of SLO to avoid a chop of metro Santa Cruz of some magnitude without having to get a supra majority, or not do a micro chop or whatever).  
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #128 on: May 04, 2012, 12:58:38 PM »

I  have no idea if the House will go for this sick puppy, or whether it will pass on the floor of the Senate. Our map looks like shear inspired genius compared to this thing, although part of "this thing" appears admittedly to have been a least change thing, but rather demonically, the map seems to have CA-01 suck up CA-02's most GOP counties, where there are a bit more Dem ones hanging like ripe low hanging fruit to pluck.
Not quite. They could still get CD1 out of SE Kansas and pull in Brown and Pottawatomie minus a thin connector to Manhattan. Grin
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #129 on: May 17, 2012, 03:52:42 AM »

It's going to court. This includes the state lege. The House actually voted down the Senate's map for itself. Grin
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #130 on: May 17, 2012, 10:47:08 AM »
« Edited: May 17, 2012, 10:51:55 AM by Torie »

Yes, it seems both sides think they will be better off if the court draws the State Senate map, with the issue being what the odds will be that some State Senate RINOS can be primaried and knocked out. Nobody seemed to give a sh*t really about the Congressional lines really.  In the end it was all about the State Senate 24/7.

So I suspect the Congressional map will be very much like the original State Senate map.

Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,205
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #131 on: May 17, 2012, 10:56:27 AM »

Yes, it seems both sides think they will be better off if the court draws the State Senate map, with the issue being what the odds will be that some State Senate RINOS can be primaried and knocked out. Nobody seemed to give a sh*t really about the Congressional lines really.  In the end it was all about the State Senate 24/7.

So I suspect the Congressional map will be very much like the original State Senate map.



So with that map, correct me if I'm wrong, Yoder would be generally be vulnerable and Jenkins would be vulnerable against a strong opponent in a Democratic year/cycle.  Also, would there be any chance Pompeo could get primaried?  I get the sense that he is not very well liked.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #132 on: May 17, 2012, 11:57:10 AM »
« Edited: May 17, 2012, 03:07:13 PM by Torie »

My impression is that Yoder is a quite talented politician, and pretty safe.  Jenkins could have a problem in a bad Pub year, particularly if the CD trends Dem, which is a distinct possibility. Pompeo's CD changes shape a bit, but as to population, not much was shifted. So that CD is pretty much status quo.

A thought that comes to me here, is that maybe the game is to go with the court maps this time, and then if enough of the State Senate RINO's can be knocked off, the true blue Pubs can proceed to draw their own maps after the election which will stand for the balance of the decade, replacing the court drawn maps, which they would not be able to do if the maps were legislatively drawn ones presumably. That might not be a bad strategy come to think of it.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #133 on: May 18, 2012, 05:14:36 AM »

My impression is that Yoder is a quite talented politician, and pretty safe.  Jenkins could have a problem in a bad Pub year, particularly if the CD trends Dem, which is a distinct possibility. Pompeo's CD changes shape a bit, but as to population, not much was shifted. So that CD is pretty much status quo.
"Safe" is pushing it, but that district is basically secure outside of wave conditions for a decent moderate-looking incumbent regardless of party.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #134 on: May 21, 2012, 06:04:45 PM »

Disgusting. Kansas should pass a law electing all 4 representatives at large.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,714
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #135 on: May 21, 2012, 06:41:20 PM »

That is prohibited under federal law.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #136 on: May 21, 2012, 07:56:39 PM »

It is mandated under federal law when a State loses representation.  This has been affirmed by the US Supreme Court.

In a case like Kansas, where the existing districts do not comply with one man one vote, it would be more reasonable for a federal court to impose at large election which was affirmed by Wesberry v Sanders as complying with OMOV, rather than a federal court usurping legislative prerogatives.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #137 on: June 03, 2012, 11:32:03 AM »

Court has heard testimony for a couple of days, will likely draw its own Senate and Federal maps from scratch. (Though the Senate never voted on the House map, everyone agrees it's basically fine.)
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #138 on: June 03, 2012, 12:04:51 PM »

Court has heard testimony for a couple of days, will likely draw its own Senate and Federal maps from scratch. (Though the Senate never voted on the House map, everyone agrees it's basically fine.)

What did the Court say that led you to that conclusion?
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #139 on: June 03, 2012, 01:19:20 PM »

Not me, some journo. (And by "draw from scratch" I suppose all that's meant is not just use one of the many plans submitted to them in toto. Obviously they wouldn't just ignore the 2002 maps.)

"The federal judges indicated through their questioning of a witness that they might be willing to try their hand at drawing district boundaries from scratch rather than rely on proposed maps offered by competing political interests." That's from the only one of the couple of articles I read earlier today that's still at the top of the "recently closed tabs" list. Same article also has something about the State House map being barely ever addressed during the deliberations.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #140 on: June 06, 2012, 10:18:28 AM »

Court has heard testimony for a couple of days, will likely draw its own Senate and Federal maps from scratch. (Though the Senate never voted on the House map, everyone agrees it's basically fine.)
You know what happened to the last Yarbrough who was elected don't you?
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #141 on: June 06, 2012, 11:40:11 AM »

Court has heard testimony for a couple of days, will likely draw its own Senate and Federal maps from scratch. (Though the Senate never voted on the House map, everyone agrees it's basically fine.)
You know what happened to the last Yarbrough who was elected don't you?
Let's put the jam on the lower shelf? His name was Yarb-O-rough. Tongue
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #142 on: June 06, 2012, 02:36:47 PM »

Court has heard testimony for a couple of days, will likely draw its own Senate and Federal maps from scratch. (Though the Senate never voted on the House map, everyone agrees it's basically fine.)
You know what happened to the last Yarbrough who was elected don't you?
Let's put the jam on the lower shelf? His name was Yarb-O-rough. Tongue
Don Yarbrough
Logged
RBH
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,210


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #143 on: June 08, 2012, 08:33:42 AM »
« Edited: June 08, 2012, 09:06:26 AM by RBH »

the judicial plan is



KS1: 67/31 JMC (was 69/30)
KS2: 53/45 JMC (was 55/43)
KS3: 50/49 JMC (was 51/48 O)
KS4: 59/39 JMC (was 58/40)

looks like any future Emporia/Manhattan KS1 candidate will have a stronger foothold in the Topeka market (applicable mainly to the R primary)
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #144 on: June 08, 2012, 08:51:11 AM »

State House and Senate out too?

Anyways, this is the Senate's original map we used in our national congressional map, except with a different non-Johnson/Wyandotte fragment for CD3.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #145 on: June 08, 2012, 08:59:47 AM »

http://blogs.kansas.com/gov/2012/06/08/court-releases-redistricting-plans-bad-news-for-two-conservative-senate-hopefuls/
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #146 on: June 08, 2012, 11:10:45 AM »
« Edited: June 08, 2012, 04:20:10 PM by Torie »

The CD map is just the first State Senate plan. Shocking!  However, the court picked up the extra 11K that KS-03 needed going south rather than north the way the State Senate plan did, which is worth an extra 20 Pub basis points. Thanks guys. Smiley
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #147 on: June 08, 2012, 11:47:58 AM »

All that angst about keeping KSU in CD 2, and yet in the end the court takes it out. Given that it wasn't unreasonable for the court to do so, I remain amazed at the recalcitrance of the legislative leaders to avoid this.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #148 on: June 08, 2012, 11:54:48 AM »
« Edited: June 08, 2012, 11:56:37 AM by Torie »

All that angst about keeping KSU in CD 2, and yet in the end the court takes it out. Given that it wasn't unreasonable for the court to do so, I remain amazed at the recalcitrance of the legislative leaders to avoid this.

They do get the award for the redistricting clowns of the nation. However remember, if the conservatives take control of the State Senate, they can redraw the maps next year, which may have been their game, which would not be the case if they signed off on some map. As to the business of the state senate districts, why can't the conservatives who want to primary the moderates, just move into the targeted districts by moving a few blocks (at least that is the case in one instance)?  What is the big deal?  That bit seems much ado about nothing.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #149 on: June 08, 2012, 12:43:55 PM »

All that angst about keeping KSU in CD 2, and yet in the end the court takes it out. Given that it wasn't unreasonable for the court to do so, I remain amazed at the recalcitrance of the legislative leaders to avoid this.

They do get the award for the redistricting clowns of the nation. However remember, if the conservatives take control of the State Senate, they can redraw the maps next year, which may have been their game, which would not be the case if they signed off on some map. As to the business of the state senate districts, why can't the conservatives who want to primary the moderates, just move into the targeted districts by moving a few blocks (at least that is the case in one instance)?  What is the big deal?  That bit seems much ado about nothing.

Four districts with four incumbents and four challengers all living within the districts. After redistricting, 100% of the incumbents remain in their districts, while 50% of the challengers were gerrymandered out of their districts. I wonder if Muon2 can model the statistical probability of that happening by random chance. Personally, it reeks of a political decision to split the difference between one map that gerrymandered no challengers and another that gerrymandered four challengers.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 3.538 seconds with 13 queries.