US House Redistricting: New York

[Sam Spade]

Redistricting New York just became a whole lot more fun.

It'll probably be some annoying incumbent protection plan thingy, though.  The districts will be removed from the obvious places, the other question, not mentioned above, is exactly how west NY will be dealt with.

[Sam Spade]

From a map drawing aesthetics perspective, it should be Engel in NY-17.  His district is the ugliest (other than Velasquez' NY-12, which won't be axed due to racial reasons).  There's no reason at all why the Bronx should share a district with Rockland County.

Obviously, the other dead district is going to have to come from Upstate.  NY-23 is probably most vulnerable to being carved up due to likely population loss and the sheer size of it.

It'd take a special election and a happier Grisanti to get a better Senate for those lines.

NY23 is a hard one to handle since I think every district bordering NY23 is now Republican and that Democratic vote from Owens base would make him formidable. Especially since the votes don't exist to totally carve the district.

Wonder how the dynamic would change if Slaughter retired, her district got distributed. How much would more Rochester wound one of the newer Republicans? Plus Chris Lee lives in Erie so some of that county will not be in Higgins district.

I don't think any of the upstate freshman Republicans are necessarily in a good spot right now because I don't recall any of them having elected state government experience and the map is probably either a compromise or court-drawn

This is the reason why I said the mess probably has to be sorted out in west NY.

[Sam Spade]

Given the history of NY, both parties will work out their gerrymanders with each other just fine, so I wouldn't exactly expect the giant conflict mentioned.

[Sam Spade]

Torie, about NY, you need to understand that both sides will always work with each other to effect resolution that keeps the politicians'/government's/corporate interests' power and screws the people (not to mention the party activists on both sides).

The GOP has always worked with the Dems in order to protect their interests and will naturally give up other things to ensure that the present situation is preserved as much as possible.  The fight will never happen on these issues.  It may, for once, occur in other places, once the new session starts.  But don't bet on it.

[Sam Spade]

Is this the decade they finally chop Staten Island in half?

You can turn the 13th into a 60% McCain district by ditching the areas along Northern Staten Island to the 8th and picking up all the bloodred territory in Queens.

Its possible if a pro-incumbent gerrymander is in order. Are you sure about those numbers, though?

He means Brooklyn - but the numbers sound right.

[Sam Spade]

If there is a compromise pro-incumbent gerrymander, I would imagine that the losses would be an upstate R and a downstate D. Any guesses as to who would be out of a seat in those cases?

I fully expect the downstate D to be Ackerman.  It could be Crowley or Maloney, but Crowley is party boss and Maloney is just younger.  Ackerman is probably close to retiring anyway.

Looking upstate - it could really be anyone.  Probably depends on who the establishment likes least.

[Sam Spade]

It looks good to me, and is the type of map I really expect to actually occur.

[Sam Spade]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Sam Spade]

I've seen Velasquez before (more than once) in the fanciest restaurants in my neighborhood.  Doubt she lives here though.

Greenpoint still has its Polish parts - or so I've learned from the Polish restaurant in my area. 

[Sam Spade]

I've seen Velasquez before (more than once) in the fanciest restaurants in my neighborhood.  Doubt she lives here though.

Well, I'm pretty sure I've ready that she's from Williamsburg, so she might well be in walking distance to the nicer restaurants around Greenpoint.

I visited a friend four or five times up by the Nassau st. station, and I was impressed by how very Polish it still was, every single bar and shop around there seemed to be Polish

Can't tell from your answer whether you think I live in Greenpoint. I don't. In fact, my answer is pretty much a dead giveaway when I live to any Brooklynite.

[Sam Spade]

I thought from your sentence structure you were implying you live in Greenpoint.  The only other place I can think of where there are Polish restaurants is across the way in Williamsburg

You don't know Brooklyn well enough then...

[Sam Spade]

I don't think the Democrats would ever agree to screw over Syracuse like that.

Considering how the Syracuse area has screwed them over time and time again, I can't say it's impossible. (I still go WTF a little over 2010) Besides cinyc is right , some major county in west/central NY is going to get screwed.

[Sam Spade]

Folks, I'd bet quite a lot of money that both sides will come to some agreement under the table that benefits the strongest party bosses of each side, and that, most likely, takes away one Dem seat and one GOP seat (relatively speaking).  That's the way things tend to work in NY.  If a court gets to it, it likely means that the end of the world is at hand.

[Sam Spade]

I know this is rather aesthetic, but in your gerrymander, can you please put Brooklyn Heights, Cobble Hill and Carroll Gardens back together.  It's an annoyance I have with the present gerrymander and it doesn't change much of anything (makes Velasquez a bit less Hispanic and Clarke/Meeks more minority, but I doubt anyone cares).  Basically, you make the boundary of Velasquez's district Court Street/Cadman Plaza West (two blocks to the east) instead of Henry St. east of 278.

[Sam Spade]

The Assembly Democrat and Senate Republican proposals are still not available.  Senate Democrats aren't going to make a proposal.

Not surprising since New York State Senate Democrats may be the most incompetent group of politicians ever.

[Sam Spade]

Who knows what a court will do if they get to do the map, but you can guarantee that since this is New York, some money will be slipped under the table at some point or some promise made...

[Sam Spade]

"Whatever that Asian area just north-east of Bay Ridge is" is Brooklyn's Chinatown (also sort-of considered part of Sunset Park), and it's arguably the main reason for the continued existence of Velasquez's district: they will raise holy hell if they're not in a district with Manhattan's Chinatown as well, and they seem to prefer being part of an Asian-Hispanic coalition district with Velasquez. 

The real reason why is because Nydia's residence is in the tiny Hispanic enclave near the harbor by Sunset Park.

[Sam Spade]

Isn't the special master drawing the maps deliberately being kept in the dark per the judge's order as to where incumbents live?

This is New York.  I wouldn't make a sizable bet on that one.

[Sam Spade]

"Whatever that Asian area just north-east of Bay Ridge is" is Brooklyn's Chinatown (also sort-of considered part of Sunset Park), and it's arguably the main reason for the continued existence of Velasquez's district: they will raise holy hell if they're not in a district with Manhattan's Chinatown as well, and they seem to prefer being part of an Asian-Hispanic coalition district with Velasquez. 

The real reason why is because Nydia's residence is in the tiny Hispanic enclave near the harbor by Sunset Park.

Is she that compelled to live in the district she represents? Gutierrez hasn't been living in his IL-4 district for some years now, though the new map puts him back within his district boundaries.

The residency laws here are really lax, but if you've met Velasquez a number of times, as I have, you would discover that she's as stubborn as a mule (and looks kinda like one too).

[Sam Spade]

Israel, King and McCarthy should all be safe, unless you get wave years, where they could all lose with this map.  Not to mention that it makes Bishop ever so slightly more Republican - I doubt he would have won there in 2010.  As one could also figure out, all four seats are marginal should they open, with McCarthy's being the least (but still a problem).

Grimm gets slightly safer I believe.  I have to look with a careful eye at upstate, but Gibson and Hayworth get a point or two more Dem for absorbing Hinchey.  Gibson gets the worst of the two.  Hanna gets a point more GOP.  I think Buerkle is dead meat, as the center of the CD switches from Rochester to Syracuse.  Reed gets slightly more Dem, but probably not enough to dislodge him absent a wave.  Hochul is going to run far away from that CD, unless she likes living life dangerously.

All in all, should be -1, -1, but Gibson, Buerkle and Hochul are the real question marks.

[Sam Spade]

Could be a done deal. If the Republicans in the State Senate are self-interested as stated, they have every reason to pass the court map altered to created the "super Jewish" seat in South Brooklyn. The changes wouldn't go through the State House, but, it would put both parties on record going into the special election.

What special election?

The Carl Kruger seat.

[Sam Spade]

Here's the only question worth asking, folks - do the State Senate Republicans get a Senate map where they still have a good opportunity at holding the majority.  If so, then these will be the maps, for 2012 at least.

[Sam Spade]

We seem to be missing the point.  The smart members of the state GOP (i.e. the State Senate and its Congressmen) are looking towards two things only:

1) shoring up incumbents insofar as they can be shored up (and they will compare to prior congressional incumbents and State Senate incumbents in Long Island and upstate NY in that regard, which is the correct, though as you can imagine, risky, measure, but considering they've had great success in the past 25 years amidst really bad, and continually worsening returns upballot, it's the correct model).

2) getting as many potentially competitive seats as possible using the above congressional incumbent/State Senate incumbent measure that are either competitive now or certainly could be under circumstances (i.e. retirement, wave).  Let's break this down...

Given Republican exploits in the past decade, that means a CD of D+3 PVI or less, I suspect, though it might be extended to D+5 in upstate, but to be cautious, let's say the former.  In the 2000 map, the number of those seats is 10 out of 29, of which Republicans hold 9.  If we extend it to D+5, we add 3 more (Higgins, Turner and Israel), of which Republicans now hold 1. 

I would need to get exact numbers to calculate PVI for the proposed court map, but it is almost certain that NY-1 through NY-3 are D+3 PVI or less (NY-1 and NY-2 will both be about R+1, NY-3 about D+0 or D+1), and it is likely that NY-4 is D+3, maybe D+4, but my suspicion is the former.  Sure King is a good bit less safe, and could be in trouble if a wave hit, but let's remember he did get 56% in 2006 and 64% in 2008.  Obviously, it becomes a greater problem if he retires, but that's the tradeoff.  The State GOP will likely view all four as potentially competitive under the above standard.

NY-9 is dead.  NY-11 remains about R+4, maybe R+5.  NY-17 (Lowey) is probably pushed down to D+6, but it might be D+5.  The State GOP may view this as competitive is vacant, but let's say for theoretical purposes they don't.  I'm almost certain that NY-18 (Hayworth) has a GOP PVI (probably R+1), but NY-19 (Gibson) is probably right at even, not going to make guesses there.  At any rate, these are two more competitive CDs.  NY-20 (Tonko) should stay at D+6.  NY-21 (Owens) did not get any help, and will be at R+1, I'm almost certain.  That's another four competitive seats for the NY GOP.

Continuing further, Hanna really gets favorable treatment in NY-22 - his CD is probably R+3 now or R+4.  To benefit Hanna, Reed in NY-23 is probably now about R+3 also.  Buerkle in NY-24 looks roughly the same as before, but may lose a point to D+4.  The NY GOP is likely to consider that potentially competitive, given Republican strength in years past - I tend to agree with those who say that this view is probably right, just not with Buerkle.  Slaughter is complaining in NY-25 because she's going to get a D+6 or D+7 district.  I don't see how this one is going to be viewed as competitive by the NY GOP, but obviously she's concerned about something (whether real or imagined).  NY-26 (Higgins) becomes safe, and NY-27 (Hochul) is probably about R+8 or so in an area that typically acts more Republican than that downballot.  Good luck to her.  So, four more seats for the state GOP to view as potentially competitive.

So, we have 12 seats that the state GOP is going to view as potentially competitive under possibly my measure (D+3) vs. 10 seats in the 2000 map (D+3).  Even if I'm wrong about NY-4 and NY-24, such that they're outside the D+3 measure, that's still 10 vs. 10.  Going with the broader measure of D+5, it is certainly 12 vs. 13, which again means that the GOP didn't really lose anything.  Going further than that, the 2000 map had 3 D+6 seats, whereas this map also has three seats that will probably be such.

Given this evaluation, why would the smart people in the GOP ever voice any opposition to what the Court is doing, other than to ask for a little help for Gibson and King's districts?  Sure, they'd like to play games to constitute a Turner/NY Jew district, but they don't hold all the cards, obviously...

[Sam Spade]

Crowley wins all those types of battles.

Looking at the State Senate map, it pretty much preserves the previous gerrymander of Long Island, though I'm sure there are changes here and there.  The seats that the Republicans gained back in 2010 were 3 and 7 that were lost in 2008 - I'd really need to examine these boundaries closely to see what was done.  5 and 6 have also been somewhat close in the 2006/2008 cycle, fwiw, the others were never close.

NYC becomes even more gerrymandered than before, in Brooklyn, particularly, - Avella (11) and Stavisky (16) are pulled into the same district on the edges, but this is Avella's territory.  Huntley (10), Gianaris (12), Peralta (13), Smith (14) retain pretty much the same shape, though note the finger they created in Addabo's district (15). (16) is open (as noted above) and a monstrosity as before - I need to see whether anything's different here - doesn't look like it on its face.  (17) is the NY Jew seat, formed from Kruger and part of Parker. Dilan, formerly (17), now becomes (18), basically the same.  Sampson (19) nor Adams (20) receives no real change worth mentioning, except Adams gets Sunset Park for some reason now, in exchange for his parts of the new NY Jew seat.  It's also an ugly gerrymander.

Parker (21) is pushed northwards, gaining more black liberal areas.  Marty Golden (GOP) in (22) took the parts of Kruger's seat that were marginal/Republican, but not Jewish - it is a gerrymander of beauty.  Savino (23) and Lanza (GOP) (24) are also pretty much the same as before. Montgomery, formerly (18), now becomes (25), basically the same.  I'm still in Squadron's district now renumbered as (26) from (25), but no real material changes.  Duane is renumbered (27) after being (29), and loses a lot of the upper West Side north of 72nd Street (don't know why) and there's also some weird gerrymander into MSG/Penn Station/Port Authority Bus Terminal for Espillat that I can't explain. Liz Kreuger's UES/Murray Hill SD becomes (28) from (26) and becomes a bit less compact.  Serrano (29) from (28) trades some of Spanish Harlem for a chunk of the Upper West Side above 72nd, which I can't particularly figure out either.  Perkins (30) still has his Harlem seat.

Getting to Espillat (31), his seat is still Washington Heights and chunks other places.  Diaz in (32) becomes much uglier, probably to protect him even better, I would suspect.  I don't believe Rivera (33) changes in any substantial way.  Klein (34) loses most of his Westchester parts, but retains basically the same structure otherwise, gaining more of the parts of the upper income/white Bronx (to the extent such things exist of course).  Hassell-Thompson gets nicer boundaries (36), but is basically the same black district.

I'll do upstate tomorrow (35 and 37-63), but as we can see, the GOP is looking to create the new NY Jew seat and shore up Golden in Brooklyn (like he really needs much - the problem is when he retires) to get 3 seats out of the city instead of 2.  I'll have to look over Queens to see if any games are being played there - nothing shows on its face, so the GOP may have well left that alone, realizing that it is probably gone.  I also need to look over Long Island - there are probably some changes at the margins that I'm missing.

State Assembly is not really worth messing with too much - pretty sure it preserves the same Dem gerrymander and massive margins.

[Sam Spade]

Sam, on the state senate, how effectively did the Pubs move the ball towards their goal of making their majority more secure than it is now? What is the partisan PVI number which is at the tipping point between control and losing control?  Are the tipping point seats around Pub PVI +3%, or greater or less?

The Senate wouldn't have proposed this map if they didn't think it secured things stronger (exactly how much that is in reality, who knows)

In Long Island, the tipping point seats will have Dem PVIs, probably D+3 to D+5, but I don't know exactly.  Truthfully, I suspect most (if not all) of the seats would be marginal in a national environment, after all Long Island as a whole is about D+1, D+2.  I need to really break down the changes in the SDs to see what happened to SDs 3, 5, 6 and 7, as these were the problem/close seats in 2006/2008.  The GOP controls it all - so all they can go is down, anyways.

In NYC, Lanza is a GOP PVI seat, the NY Jew seat is certainly one, though historically Dem down the ballot (but that is probably changing too).  Golden's seat certainly got more Republican areas, so it may have gotten back to a GOP PVI (I know it wasn't before), but I don't know for sure.  At any rate, Golden will never be beaten so long as he's on the ballot, so who cares. 

As you are aware, the GOP lost their last historical seat in Queens in the last election, but I don't know whether any of the games that I'm seeing would have any effect in the Queens seats that are most favorable to the GOP.  I suspect not, as I think that ship has sailed.  The Republicans aren't packed like they are in Brooklyn.

All in all, I really can only see the GOP, at best, getting one seat from this map in NYC and Long Island.  (presently 24-11 (techically 23-11-1), with 2 "independent" Dems) Upstate is 21-6, so I have to see what seats have actually been made more problematic.  Upstate will be later, and I'll give a little more of a close look.