Would you accept this AZ map as a compromise, or urge your team fight on?

[Torie]

OK,  given the lay of the land, where we probably will have a new 5th commissioner, and who knows what that person will do, and whether that person is too much of a Mathis redux, will also be impeached, and on and on, with maybe a court finally drawing a map, if  the map below were suggested, and you were one of the partisan commissioners, would you agree to it, or think that your team could do better continuing to fight on pursuing  other remedies, bearing in mind that you might get a worse deal?

I tried as honestly as I could to follow the law, given what I now know, and then having done that, did make an attempt to make some of the CD's as "competitive" as reasonably practicable, without traducing jurisdictional lines, and so forth, without a good reason to do so for other than partisan reasons. But where there was some running room, I tried to tilt the CD's to the Dems a bit. I did what I think I would do as a judge. What do you think? I used the Torie partisan baseline, but bear in mind, that the sbane partisan baseline, would push up the GOP PVI by one point. I prefer mine, but it is subjective, and sbane's is hardly ludicrous, and reasonable minds can differ.

Sorry to create  a new thread on this, but that is the only way to be able to generate a poll.



 

[krazen1211]

Yep, I would.

[Sbane]

The swing districts need to be made about 4 points Mccain for me to agree to it. Those are lean Republican districts. Like R+2. Especially that Tucson district. Get rid of that northeast county, add more of Tucson. And the 5th can pick up a bit more of inner city Phoenix, and less northern exurbs.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I was about to say the Hopis won't like being lumped together with the Navajos, but I guess that's changed!

http://www.fronterasdesk.org/news/2011/oct/05/native-american-redistricting-congress-census/

[Torie]

The swing districts need to be made about 4 points Mccain for me to agree to it. Those are lean Republican districts. Like R+2. Especially that Tucson district. Get rid of that northeast county, add more of Tucson. And the 5th can pick up a bit more of inner city Phoenix, and less northern exurbs.

As to AZ-05, those "northern exurbs" are about 2 precincts. I followed the roads, and there is not much to cut into Phoenix that is not uber Hispanic, and the core of AZ-07.  I also lapped up about all of the heavily Hispanic precincts to the west of former AX-07, so that it was not unduly diluted. Going for more, means diluting it with Anglo Pubbies. That will not be attractive to a court, particularly if it splits municipal lines.  Adding more of Tucson to AZ-01 (which means grabbing Hispanic precincts), means AZ-02 will have to march into the Phoenix metro area. Good luck with that, all for about 50 basis points.

It is not clear to me at all that a court will be as accommodating as this map, to a close to even CD in Phoenix(AZ-05), and yet another that by deliberate design (I played with Glendale) is within reach given the right circumstances (AZ-09), and giving the Dems much more in AZ-01 given the VRA. I was also quite kind to AZ-04. A court might make it more Pubbie. Bear in mind that the courts in AZ tend to be pro GOP.

[Sbane]

Well, there is still Hispanic territory to be picked up west of Phoenix that you put into other districts. Not that it's particularly Democratic territory, but lots of Hispanics around. And you can do that without going into Phoenix. And if that isn't enough population to bring AZ-1 out of Graham and Grenlee county, then so be it. I would prefer a Cochise and Pima county map. You seem intent on giving the mustachioed man Tuscon liberals for some reason.

As for the Phoenix area, I wouldn't mess with the Hispanic 7th district. Just swap areas in north phoenix for the ones bordering the 7th district. Though I am not sure if this would lead to an appreciable change in partisanship. I am way more concerned about the Tucson district. A moderate (to liberal on certain issues) dem should be elected from Tucson and if a Republican is elected, he should have to be a moderate as well. I don't care about making sure Grijalva is safe, as long as the VRA is followed. If Grijalva is an idiot who can't get elected, that's his fault.

And if the Republicans just use this whole crap about Mathis to get a favorable map drawn for them by some corrupt judge, then shame on them. They should let the commission do it's work. If Mathis needs to be replaced, then so be it.

[Torie]

The issue sbane, is not what you want, but whether you think it worth the risk to reject this plan, and hope a court or something gives you something better, rather than something worse.

[Sbane]

Who has drawn up this plan? The map should be drawn by the commission, end of discussion. It shouldn't be drawn by the courts. That's a bunch of crap, and is worse than anything the commission did. And you know it. And if the Republicans just keep impeaching people till they get exactly what they want, then F them! Seriously these people need to grow the F up. What a bunch of complaining children. Impeaching someone once is fine, but if they just keep doing it....ugh. Will you denounce it?

Impeaching someone has to be something done as a last resort. Clinton's impeachment comes to mind now...seems to be a pattern with Republicans? Anyways, the last map was crap and hopefully things are sensibly resolved. This map isn't too far from what I would draw except for Tuscon of course. Phoenix looks fine more or less.

Again we don't know what will happen, but if Republicans just start impeaching people unless they get what they want, what is the point of a commission in the first place? This needs to be taken out of the hands of the politicians. It just has to be. Even this whole Mathis mess is of their own making. Politicians recommend the independent who is on the commission right? Obviously a Phoenix Dem had a deal with her.....

[CultureKing]

I guess I am an odd dem... I would take the bate. Mainly because I have the feeling that Arizona will be trending left for the next ten years and that by the time 2020 rolls around I could see a 6D 3R delegation as a possibility (by the way this is pure speculation, not really based on facts or anything). Using 2008 numbers to redistrict Arizona is a huge gamble.  Although obviously the map still is biased in favor of the Rs.

[Sbane]

I guess I am an odd dem... I would take the bate. Mainly because I have the feeling that Arizona will be trending left for the next ten years and that by the time 2020 rolls around I could see a 6D 3R delegation as a possibility (by the way this is pure speculation, not really based on facts or anything). Using 2008 numbers to redistrict Arizona is a huge gamble.  Although obviously the map still is biased in favor of the Rs.

I just think Tuscon should have a greater say in that district. Way too much cutting in the above map. And one of the Phoenix districts should be made more swing if the other criteria are followed. And above all it should be done by a commission instead of the legislature by proxy with the threat of endless impeachments! It's not right and it doesn't set the right precedent. I can't believe people don't have more of a problem with it. Has the political culture really degraded that much?

Though in a way I do see what you are saying. It seems like there are about 5 districts that could be classified as swing district of sorts and with demographic changes, might become true swing districts rather than lean rep swing districts. Maybe a Dem might actually vote for a map like this.

[Torie]

Who has drawn up this plan? The map should be drawn by the commission, end of discussion. It shouldn't be drawn by the courts. That's a bunch of crap, and is worse than anything the commission did. And you know it. And if the Republicans just keep impeaching people till they get exactly what they want, then F them! Seriously these people need to grow the F up. What a bunch of complaining children. Impeaching someone once is fine, but if they just keep doing it....ugh. Will you denounce it?

Impeaching someone has to be something done as a last resort. Clinton's impeachment comes to mind now...seems to be a pattern with Republicans? Anyways, the last map was crap and hopefully things are sensibly resolved. This map isn't too far from what I would draw except for Tuscon of course. Phoenix looks fine more or less.

Again we don't know what will happen, but if Republicans just start impeaching people unless they get what they want, what is the point of a commission in the first place? This needs to be taken out of the hands of the politicians. It just has to be. Even this whole Mathis mess is of their own making. Politicians recommend the independent who is on the commission right? Obviously a Phoenix Dem had a deal with her.....

Do you think you will end up with a better deal by rejecting this plan or not, that is the unanswered question.  We can argue about who F'ed whom when, and will, and no doubt it would be fun, but that is an entirely separate issue.

I do see your point about converting AZ-05 into an L shaped CD, which might move it a bit, but I highly doubt a court would do that, not  with N-S elongated Scottsdale next door in particular. So rejecting this plan to get that, rather than well, I could show you another "reasonable" cut that you would like less, is your choice, not mine. And you won't get "a within reach" AZ-09 either more likely than not. Cheers.

[Sbane]

Phoenix area I would have to draw out myself to see what is reasonable or not. Obviously the only reason to switch the areas, and not keep the districts elongated as you have drawn them, would be to make it more competitive. And that is the last criteria the commission gets to look at, so if everything else is met they should be able to do it without some Hayworth impersonators impeaching them for it.

Now we shouldn't be so hasty, Mathis drew a bad map, and she got thrown out. Can't assume it will happen to someone who draws a more reasonable map, but not something that pleases every Republican out there. I mean should the Dems in Washington take on the map being drawn in their state? Should the Dems in California get rid of the commission map and try to see if they can get the Republican delegation into the single digits? Where does it stop?

It's not a matter of getting a better deal, it's a matter of the legislature not being able to blackmail the commission.

Anyways, a Dem might actually approve this map due to their being so many potential swing districts. Politicians are greedy bastards.

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

The swing districts need to be made about 4 points Mccain for me to agree to it. Those are lean Republican districts. Like R+2. Especially that Tucson district. Get rid of that northeast county, add more of Tucson. And the 5th can pick up a bit more of inner city Phoenix, and less northern exurbs.

I agree with this analysis.

As to whether or not I think I could get a better deal, it's a gamble to be sure. But I'm on the side that has nothing to lose.

If anything, I would reject the compromise out of pure spite.

[Torie]

Here's the Tucson cut by the way: clean as a whistle. Good luck playing with it, and keeping it pretty, and meeting the VRA.

[muon2]

Here's the Tucson cut by the way: clean as a whistle. Good luck playing with it, and keeping it pretty, and meeting the VRA.

What are the Hispanic standards for the VRA in AZ. Your CD 2 is at 50.1% if I'm reading it correctly, which would come under fire in many jurisdictions as too dilute. Just dropping La Paz from the existing CD 7 puts it above that. With some manipulation of the current CD-7/4 boundary and moving CD 4 into west Mesa, I can get two districts with HVAPs of 58-59%. Wouldn't a court find that a better fit for the VRA?

[minionofmidas]

Lolno

[minionofmidas]

Torie's AZ-2 is a Dem pack that happens to be 50.1% Hispanic. It's not a Hispanic pack in any way. It also splits a reservation, of course.
The Phoenix seat is similarly drawn - going after Dem precincts, not Hispanic precincts, Retroceding out of "protected" Hispanic areas as a result. (The added advantage is, of course, that White Liberal precincts have higher turnout, so the net vote gain for Republicans for the remainder is greater.)

[Sbane]

The 7th here is 54.5% VAP, and it doesn't go into Phoenix or Glendale. It does take in the suburbs on the west side of Phoenix, but it has to for it to be a real Hispanic district. It also goes in and takes in the Hispanic areas of Pinal county and gets rid of the non Hispanic areas around Yuma. I didn't even catch how low the Hispanic % was in your 2nd Hispanic district. That map is certainly unacceptable.

And your Tucson cut is pretty hilarious as well. It includes some precincts that are like 70% white, but had another characteristic that would make them "appropriate" to put in the mustachioed man's district as you saw it.

[krazen1211]

Torie's AZ-2 is a Dem pack that happens to be 50.1% Hispanic. It's not a Hispanic pack in any way. It also splits a reservation, of course.
The Phoenix seat is similarly drawn - going after Dem precincts, not Hispanic precincts, Retroceding out of "protected" Hispanic areas as a result. (The added advantage is, of course, that White Liberal precincts have higher turnout, so the net vote gain for Republicans for the remainder is greater.)

He did certainly cheat the Tucson white liberals a bit. That said, since you can avoid splitting Glendale, I don't think that is quite as bad.

[Sbane]

I made a few changes, got rid of most of the Pinal County areas and added more marginal Hispanic territory in Tuscon to the 7th. But since the area in Pinal was marginally Hispanic anyways, it didn't change the racial numbers. What this ensured was that some of the Tuscon district would go into Cochise. Actually I had a good mind not to enter Cochise at all, but I did it as a compromise. That is what a real compromise looks like.

I still need to draw all of Phoenix, but I suspect the numbers won't change much from Torie's map. And that is appropriate. A dem leaning swing district in Tuscon and a rep leaning swing district in Phoenix. Anything else is just crap, and as bad as any map drawn by Mathis. And if the Republicans would impeach someone over a map like that, they can go to hell. I think Washington state Democrats should start impeaching people on their commission as well. What do you guys think?

[Sbane]

This is the best map I would give to the Republicans in Tuscon. I am almost giving away too much. Should be more like an even Obama-Mccain district.

[krazen1211]

This would be a much more proper swing district in Maricopa. 51.4% McCain 47.3% Obama.

[Torie]

Torie's AZ-2 is a Dem pack that happens to be 50.1% Hispanic. It's not a Hispanic pack in any way. It also splits a reservation, of course.
The Phoenix seat is similarly drawn - going after Dem precincts, not Hispanic precincts, Retroceding out of "protected" Hispanic areas as a result. (The added advantage is, of course, that White Liberal precincts have higher turnout, so the net vote gain for Republicans for the remainder is greater.)

The Phoenix CD is 57.5% Hispanic, and does go after Hispanic voters, while staying within municipal lines. Oh dear, one precinct in Avon is Native American and does need to be in AZ-03 even though it does not make the map as pretty. It has almost no people.  I assume that irrelevant split from a population and partisan standpoint is what you are referring to.

[Torie]

The 7th here is 54.5% VAP, and it doesn't go into Phoenix or Glendale. It does take in the suburbs on the west side of Phoenix, but it has to for it to be a real Hispanic district. It also goes in and takes in the Hispanic areas of Pinal county and gets rid of the non Hispanic areas around Yuma. I didn't even catch how low the Hispanic % was in your 2nd Hispanic district. That map is certainly unacceptable.

And your Tucson cut is pretty hilarious as well. It includes some precincts that are like 70% white, but had another characteristic that would make them "appropriate" to put in the mustachioed man's district as you saw it.

You think a court will grab Hispanics west of Phoenix to put in the Tucson CD, so that it can pick up more white liberals in Tucson. I deliberately did not do that (and you have to do that to get the Dem percentage up in AZ-01), because I don't think a court will do that, nor an unbiased commissioner. So if that is your demand, we litigate. No deal!    Krazen's marginal CD looks good, and it does avoid splitting Glendale, and is certainly an option. Something has to be split however.

Below is a slightly revised map of Tucson, which drops the GOP percentage in AZ-01 by 20 basis points down to 52.7% McCain. I discovered Flowering Wells, which is close to 30% Hispanic, and marginal, and put it in AZ-02, which allowed adding 3 liberal white precincts to AZ-01 (the ones right on top of the University of Arizona of course).  The only liberal precincts still in AZ-02 which are under 25% Hispanic are in red and yellow, which the yellow being between 20%-25% Hispanic, and the red ones being between 15%-20% Hispanic. There are no other more Hispanic precincts  to put into AZ-02 which are within reach, so that AZ-01 can suck up more of the red precincts. None - at least none that I could find.

So the VRA creates a wall against the Dems getting what they want in Tucson, unless you cause AZ-02 to go into the Hispanic suburbs west of Phoenix. No deal! The Pubs should litigate against that tooth and nail in my opinion. I don't think it comports with the AZ law, cutting back AZ-02's footprint in Tucson and creating a Phoenix area salient for purely partisan reasons. There is nothing compact or community of interest related about that. It makes AZ-02 more like a wandering gypsy. I suspect the Pubbie friendly AZ Supremes will be listening to this line of reasoning very closely on this one.

[Torie]

Here's the Tucson cut by the way: clean as a whistle. Good luck playing with it, and keeping it pretty, and meeting the VRA.

What are the Hispanic standards for the VRA in AZ. Your CD 2 is at 50.1% if I'm reading it correctly, which would come under fire in many jurisdictions as too dilute. Just dropping La Paz from the existing CD 7 puts it above that. With some manipulation of the current CD-7/4 boundary and moving CD 4 into west Mesa, I can get two districts with HVAPs of 58-59%. Wouldn't a court find that a better fit for the VRA?

The VRA does not require more than 50.1%, and after the VRA is met, the balance of the law is driven by other criteria. There is no retrogression. To get AZ-02 to a higher Hispanic percentage requires it going into the Phoenix metro area.  I don't think that comports with the law's parameters very well, and I doubt a court would do that. I did the best I could to get the Hispanic percentage maximized in AZ-02 while avoiding Phoenix (or creating erosity in Tucson for the sole purpose of getting the Dem percentage up, which I don't think a court will do or should do).  To get AZ-02 a lot more Dem, requires dumping quite heavily Hispanic precincts in Tucson into it with AZ-02 making up the lost Hispanics in Phoenix. If the Dems demand that, as a Pubbie I would litigate.

Well anyway, I did round up a few Dem votes here. Not bad! I do think there is a real risk the Dems will get a worse deal if they reject this one. Yes I do. We shall see what happens. It should be interesting.