US House Redistricting: Arizona

[CARLHAYDEN]

Here's the best guess (at this time) based on the numbers presently available.

Current congressional district 2 (Franks, R) with the largest district (972,839) will become a northwest Maricopa county district, losing the northern (non-Maricopa) part of the district to district 1 (Gosar, R)

Current district 1 (Gosar, R) will lose the southern part of the District (Pinal, Gila, Graham and Greenlee) to the new district 9, and gain what is currently the northern part of CD 2.

The new district 9 will be composed of the southern part of current district 1 (Pinal, Gila, Graham and Greenlee) as well as the southern sliver of current district 6, and the Pinal parts of District 7 and 8.

Current district 7 will lose Pinal county part to the new district 9, and the Maricopa part to district 4 (Pastor, D).

Current district 4 (Pastor, D) will pick up Maricopa county part of current district 7, and give up one or two precincts to current district 3.

Current district 3, will picking up territory (and population) from district four (a precinct or two).

Current district 5 (Schweikert, R) will gain a number of precincts  from current district 6 (Flake, R) along the northern and northwestern edges.

Current district 8 will lose the precincts in Pinal county to the new district 9, and around a dozen precincts in central Tucson to current congressional district 7.

Current district 6 lose population to both districts 5 and the new district 9 (as described above)

Under this scenario, the two new congressmen will likely be Russell Pearce (CD 6) and Paul Babeau (CD9).

With the exception of CD 8, the changes indicated will not change the partisan leanings of the existing districts. 

The question in CD 8 is how many Democrat precincts will be transferred to CD 7.  The incumbent Democrat won reelection without a majority of the vote, and would have lost if a half-a-dozen heavily Democrat precincts likely to go to CD 7 had not been in the 8th on the 2010 general election.

Some useful information can be obtained at:

http://www.azredistricting.org/final/congfinal.jpg

[CARLHAYDEN]

Source? The link is to the archived 2000 redistricting commission's website, of course.
Taking those suggestions literally, northern Arizona is a heavy R gerrymander, the Apache and Gila River reservations are split between districts, CD4 is more than a hundred thousand over population and CD 9 under. Oh, and CD 4 is in two disconnected parts, strictly speaking.

Full breakdown: CD1 15k over (easily remedied), CD2 55k over (that's its current Maricopa portion), CD3 on target if left unchanged, CD4 128k over, not including the rural bits in southwest Maricopa that it could only connect to through Pinal, CD5 on target since I added enough to be on target, CD 6 and 9 combined (since its hard to fathom what they meant, exactly, and it doesn't matter really) 171k under, CD7 26k under, CD8 on target.

Don't know where you got your numbers.

Here's some of mine (along with source)

While CD 3 is pretty easy to maintain (and a precinct or two) significant change will occur for CDs 1,4,5, and 8.

Substantial change will occur for CD 7 and enomeous change for CDs 2 and 6.

Arizona                                         6,395,017
CD 1                                                 774,310 – 710,224 = 64,086
CD 2                                                 972,839 – 710,224 = 262,615 

CD 3                                                 707,919 -710,224 =  +2,305

CD 4                                                 698,314 – 710,224 = 11,910

CD 5                                                 656,833 – 710,224 = 53,391

CD 6                                                 971,733 – 710,224 = 261,509

CD 7                                                 855,769 – 710,224 = 145,545

CD 8                                                 754,300 – 710,224 = 44,076

Current average (for 8 CDs)         799,002

New average (for 9 CDs)              710,224

http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2011/03/census-numbers-arizonas-legislative-and-congressional-districts-.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BlogForArizona+%28Blog+For+Arizona%29

[CARLHAYDEN]

"After months of administrative drudgery and political tumult the five-person panel charged with redrawing Arizona’s political districts released its first set of working maps Saturday. The initial “grid” maps only meet two of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission’s six constitutionally mandated criteria - equal population and contiguity. From there, significant adjustments will be made..."

http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2011/08/13/redistricting-commission-unveils-first-set-of-maps/

The map is so preposterous (not suprising given that the authors of the map are Democrat party hacks) its highly unlikely to be implemented.

[CARLHAYDEN]

The map is done.  Yes, I know, it's brilliant. Thanks.

From the 2001 map, GOP picks up 2 seats in AZ (the new seat plus the Gifford's seat), plus makes a swing CD, AZ-09, move from very weak GOP lean (about a 2% GOP PVI) to weak  GOP safe (4.3% GOP PVI). The old northern CD, then labeled AZ-01, was a about a 4% GOP PVI (so on the cusp between "safe" and "lean"), and is now replaced with two safe northern CD's as well.

The commission never gets to its final (and secondary) parameter, after having maxed the others, to wit, "competitiveness." This map degrades it, but it meets all the paramount parameters I think - to a tee. AZ-07 by the way bounces up from the grid from around 50% Hispanic VAP, to 55.4% Hispanic VAP. In the 2001 map, it was around 60% Hispanic VAP. It needs to be juiced up from the grid - and it is. The Lord wants 50% plus Hispanic CVAP to the extent possible (it isn't with AZ-02, and it takes work to get up even to 50% VAP), and I am here to serve him.



The numbers are off because Arizona specializes in huge precincts in places, large numbers of which are over 4,000, and a fair number between 4,000 and 10,000, with a few even larger than that. They will have to be bifurcated.  (Addendum: the map was slightly revised to separate the Hopi from the Navajo, since the Commission will almost certainly do that, just like it did 10 years ago. when it really had to reach to do it.)



From the grid, AZ-09 picks up the southern end of Scottsdale per plan, and loses a southern tier of Phoenix precincts to AZ-07, AZ-03 gets all of Chandler, and picks up a bunch of precincts that were in AZ-07 at its southern end, but were on the wrong side of some impassible mountain (that big green precinct in AZ-07 at its now southern edge), plus have nothing in common with the balance of AZ-07 (high income white and Republican) and thus a ludicrous appendage even though in Phoenix (the southern tier of these precincts in Phoenix were already in now AZ-03 per the grid, and I just added the balance of them), and AZ-03 needed the precincts anyway, AZ-06 gets most of Gilbert except the two southern most precincts, and the balance of Mesa (except for a small slice at its NE corner which the grid assigned to AZ-05, and needs to say there), AZ-05 picks up the rest of Gila County, AZ-01 picks up the rest of Greenlee County, and loses its share of Santa Cruz to AZ-02, and all is right with the world.  



A lagniappe is that I figured out an absolutely gorgeous gerry of Tuscon which also manages to max compactness.  Isn't that just special?  

A very good map.

Far better than either of the two maps produced by the Commission.

But then, the Commission is composed of three Democrats (one of whom made a claim to be and Independent), and two Republicans. 

Naturally the three Democrats voted to hire a Democrat firm to do the Gerrymandering, er, redistricting.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Yesterday the commission discussed a map where they modified the second grid option to conform to the VRA. It looked similar to Torie's map except:

• They didn't do the Hopi-Navajo gerrymander, and
• The tan district on Torie's map went further southeast. It looked more like a Pinal-Tucson district.

It's important to note that it's still an early draft, and conforms only to the VRA and the requirements met by the grid map.

Yep.

The orginal map the Democrats came up with was absurd.

They have had to back down.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Arizona Capitol Times
 
Horne: Redistricting commissioner claims chairwoman destroyed documents

By Evan Wyloge - evan.wyloge@azcapitoltimes.com

Published: September 7, 2011 at 7:27 pm

One of Arizona’s redistricting commissioners told Attorney General Tom Horne that the commission’s chairwoman destroyed documents used to score mapping firms during a closed-door meeting.

http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2011/09/07/horne-redistricting-commissioner-claims-chairwoman-destroyed-documents/

[CARLHAYDEN]

http://www.rollcall.com/news/arizona_governor_jan_brewer_starts_impeachment_against_redistricting_panel-209840-1.html

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has taken the first step today in what had been previously called “the nuclear option” in seeking a more Republican-friendly redistricting map.

The GOP governor began the impeachment process for removing members from the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission by submitting a letter outlining her grievances to commission Chairwoman Colleen Mathis.

Colleen Mathis is the only one likely to be removed.

She concealed the evidence of her (extreme) partisanship before her appointment (as an alleged Independent).

She has been the leader of consistent efforts to hire only Democrats for staff (and consultants) , have secret (illegal) meetings, and destroy records.

She has violated the explicit instructions for redistricting in the ballot measure creating the commission (espresso pundit has a nice summary).  http://www.espressopundit.com/, see Open and Shut case.

Her illegal activities may well get her indicted (and hopefully some jail time).

[CARLHAYDEN]

Are redistricting commission appointments always this litigious, or is this year just bad for Arizona's Commission?

The system worked reasonably well in the past.

This year the Democrats successfully foisted one of their own on the commission as an ostensible "independent."

They tried to keep "Christians" off the commission and tried to appoint legally ineligible persons to the commission (the Arizona Supreme Court ruled against them).

Mathis engaged in a number of illegal actions including, but not limited to, secret meetings, destroying records and hiding critical documents.

The Congressional map is acknowledged to violate the 'compactness' standard established both by the Supreme Court of the United States and the law stipulating the criteria that the Commission "shall" use in establishing districts.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I still don't like Florence with the western edge of the state. There's not even a contiguous road connection.

Mathis has gone bezerk.

She really believes she can get away with anything.

She is a rabid, foaming at the mouth Democrat, as well as a liar and cheat.

The congressional districting proposal she supports will be struck down by the courts.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I wonder if this map can be appropriately gummed up in preclearance proceedings.

Nah.

The map was designed to be as favorable to the Democrats as possible.

However, expect a judicial challenge to the map.

[CARLHAYDEN]

AZ-9 is certainly a grotesque gerrymander.

Exactly!!!