Whose Districts are most likely to disappear?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 08:14:42 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)
  Whose Districts are most likely to disappear?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Whose Districts are most likely to disappear?  (Read 2323 times)
beesley
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,140
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 10, 2019, 05:10:11 AM »

I was making a 2022 Illinois Map on DRA, and I've managed to eliminate Kinzinger's seat entirely, being absorbed by some of Shimkus' and Foster's districts.

Or so I thought. It seems the Northern district I created with the Rockford area and some Chicago exurbs eliminated Underwood's seat. But on closer inspection... I had eliminated Foster's district.

So many of you will have some calculation to work out which district are eliminated. With that fact, which district are most likely to be eliminated in each state at the next census? Some are quite obvious - good luck Alex Mooney.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2019, 01:10:13 PM »

The consensus on this board is that NY-22 (Brindisi/Tenney) is likely to go because it's easy to carve up and isn't one Democrats will want to preserve, Brindisi's incumbency notwithstanding.

Similarly, if Pennsylvania has a bipartisan or court-drawn map, it's hard to see both PA-9 and PA-12 staying intact as they are now with the loss of 1 seat and population growth focused on SEPA. Both of them are "leftovers" rural districts and all other districts in the southeast and around Harrisburg and York make coherent districts.

For Alabama, I'll bet AL-2. Geography dictates AL-2, AL-3, or AL-4. The other four can't be dissolved. Carving up AL-2 is probably the easiest and Martha Roby is the least popular and entrenched incumbent in the state.

I'm curious what people suggest for Michigan (bipartisan) or Ohio (Republican).

MI-11 looks like the likeliest cut because it's ostensibly Republican, you can make MI-8 more Republican by getting rid of it, and repopulate other districts around Detroit, but I think that's too lopsided a result for Whitmer to accept.

For Ohio, it depends on how much the Mahoning Valley has really moved away from Dems. I do think cutting up Tim Ryan's district just ends up endangering a neighboring R district.
Logged
Zaybay
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,076
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.25, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2019, 09:50:35 PM »

Im just going to post this here so we all are on the same page on the possible losses:


The states facing a possible loss are
- RI
- NY (possibly 2)
- PA
- WV
- OH
- MI
- IL
- AL
- MN (possibly)
- CA (possibly)
Logged
Zaybay
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,076
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.25, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2019, 12:12:49 AM »
« Edited: March 11, 2019, 08:17:02 AM by Former Senator Zaybay »

Alright, so Im going to take a swing at this.

RI: For this one, its going to be an AL-District, a battle between Cicilline and Langevin. I would think Cicilline would win this battle, but it would be a tough call.

NY: Due to the D trifecta, its highly likely the map in NY will bare no resemblance to the current one. But for cut districts, the first one would have to be from upstate. Bridisni is incredibly unlucky, considering his district is both in the prime location to be cut, and has faced the Deepest decline in population. After him, the next district would also have to be Upstate, with the most likely candidate being the 24th district, containing Katko, due to a similar large decrease in population, optimal positioning, and the fact that this would dislodge the popular incumbent. Of course, they could also go for Delgado's seat, but I see this as more likely being drawn closer to NY than it being gotten rid of entirely.

PA: For this state, the map will either be drawn by the courts, or by a compromise between Dems and Reps. There are two targets for deletion in this map, both benefiting one of the parties. PA-12 has experienced heavy population decline, and its very possible that its cut up, especially considering that there will be a newbie in that seat. However, Dems may object to this, as such a lost seat would mean that Cartwright may finally be defeated. The other option would be getting rid of PA-15. This is district has actually lost the most population out of all of them, and such a deletion would make sense. This move, however, benefits the Dems more, as this would just shore up the currently held GOP seats, and not effect any of their vulnerable incumbents. Of course, this would put the Erie-based seat off the playing field, however.

WV: WV-02, this one needs no explanation.

OH: This one is rather tricky. Unless the Dems win control of the State Supreme Court(which would require them to take two seats in the 2020 election, unlikely but possible), the "Commission" would be run by the Republicans. This would mean a good amount of the gerrymandering they had done in 2010 may be sustained. The only problem for Republicans is Columbus. While the entire state has been declining in population, Columbus OH has been experiencing explosive growth, 10%. This has gotten to the point that the Ds may gain a seat in the Columbus area. But anyway, back to the lost seat, there are three possibilities. OH-13, OH-6, and OH-02. For OH-13, its one of the only D districts in the state, but its lost so much population that its now possible to remove the seat entirely. This would be the most partisan choice, but it may have some repercussions in the creation of more tossup/D seats elsewhere. For OH-06, this seat has lost the most pop, and the Rs may see it as the optimal seat to split, reinforcing the rest of the congressional. OH-02 is a similar story, its lost a lot of people, and getting rid of it reinforces the R gerry. But with how OH is, I cannot be confident on any of this.

MI: This state will be using a non-partisan redistricting commission come 2022, but one that will take partisanship into account. Funny enough, whats most likely is the elimination of MI-05, which is a D seat containing Flint, while the current D delegation is shored up, and a tossup seat is made in the South West, possibly more.

IL: If you think the Ds are losing any ground in IL from this, even at the peak they are currently on, Mike Madigan has a thing or two to say about that. Due to the decline happening outside Chicagoland, the seat lost will, most likely, either be IL-13 or IL-12. Now, why these specific seats? Because getting rid of one of them allows the drawing of a D seat downstate, basically, getting rid of 1 GOP seat while flipping another. The seats the Ds captured in 2018 will likely be shored up as well, with the Rs being confined in 3 seats.

AL: This is really just a popularity game, which I would guess Roby would lose, especially since her seat is prime for cutting up.

MN: If a seat is deleted, it would likely be MN-07 being combined with another seat, to make an R vote sink of sorts. MN-01 is the likely candidate.

CA: Im not going to guess which seat out of the 55 are going to be cut, but I can tell you the area. Northern CA. It would also most likely be a D seat, though such a cut may have repercussions on the Rs left in the state.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2019, 10:15:22 AM »

Zaybay, that's a great summary.

I have questions about a couple of suggestions you made, and they're actually the same question, re: NY-24 and MI-5. Are you imagining Onondaga County and/or Syracuse would be cut in two? I don't see how you avoid having an Onondaga County seat, and thus a Katko seat, especially if NY-22 is already divided up to its east.

Similarly, Gennessee County MI has more than 50% of the population of a Congressional District. This is a problem similar to the Tim Ryan's district problem - can you really get rid of that district without its population center "taking over" whatever district it's combined with? Do you think that they'd pair Flint with Lansing for a revised MI-8? I think a Flint-based legislator wins no matter what. 
Logged
Zaybay
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,076
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.25, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2019, 10:54:53 AM »

Zaybay, that's a great summary.

I have questions about a couple of suggestions you made, and they're actually the same question, re: NY-24 and MI-5. Are you imagining Onondaga County and/or Syracuse would be cut in two? I don't see how you avoid having an Onondaga County seat, and thus a Katko seat, especially if NY-22 is already divided up to its east.

Similarly, Gennessee County MI has more than 50% of the population of a Congressional District. This is a problem similar to the Tim Ryan's district problem - can you really get rid of that district without its population center "taking over" whatever district it's combined with? Do you think that they'd pair Flint with Lansing for a revised MI-8? I think a Flint-based legislator wins no matter what. 

For NY, its mostly due to D partisanship that NY-24 is cut up. And its for a rather specific reason, its to get rid of 2 R incumbents with one stone. I believe that, to maximize their seat count, the Ds would draw Katko's base of Syracuse into NY-21, repositioning it to be more D and along the Canadian border. To be honest, I had a hard time figuring out which 2nd seat would be cut up, and thats the best I can come up with.

Its also possible, though not likely, that the second seat deleted is a Long Island seat, but the area has not seen such a decline in population that it would become the area of deletion.

For MI, it would, at first, be a Tim Ryan problem, due to how D Flint is. But the problem is that this area is trending R rapidly, and bleeding profusely. Its a seat that would make its successors tossups for 1 or 2 cycles before becoming R seats.

Of course, these are just my takes on the situation.
Logged
Tintrlvr
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,286


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2019, 11:57:12 AM »

Well, "cutting" Katko's seat doesn't necessarily mean eliminating a Syracuse-based seat or otherwise chopping up Onondaga County. A Syracuse-Ithaca seat is pretty natural and is unwinnable even for Katko.
Logged
catographer
Megameow
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,498
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 11, 2019, 08:05:39 PM »

kinda shocking california may lose a seat. which one do y'all think will go???
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 11, 2019, 08:13:29 PM »

Well, "cutting" Katko's seat doesn't necessarily mean eliminating a Syracuse-based seat or otherwise chopping up Onondaga County. A Syracuse-Ithaca seat is pretty natural and is unwinnable even for Katko.

Katko won by 13,700 votes in 2018. In 2016, Tompkins County gave Hillary Clinton a margin of 16,000 votes over Trump, with Stein and Johnson taking 3% each. I suppose if Dems take out strong Republican territory to put it in Katko's district, I can see it. The Southern Tier district would have to take in Binghamton from NY-22 and probably even more than that.
Logged
America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS
Solid4096
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,730


Political Matrix
E: -8.88, S: -8.51

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 11, 2019, 08:14:56 PM »



Note that this does not account for intra-state population trends, buts its still pretty natural for a District to be drawn in the Flint Strip.
The PVI of this District is less Democratic that both the current gerrymander, and of the ideal current hypothetical nonpartisan version of the District, but only by a fraction of a point.
Logged
Starry Eyed Jagaloon
Blairite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 11, 2019, 10:05:38 PM »

kinda shocking california may lose a seat. which one do y'all think will go???
Whole state probably redrawn so unclear, but the Bay Area/Central coast districts are somewhat determined by geography, so even with shifts, they'll have a natural representative. Probably going to be somewhere in the LA Basin, where the lines could go any  which way, is where someone is cut, which is going to be convoluted with VRA.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 11, 2019, 10:25:57 PM »

kinda shocking california may lose a seat. which one do y'all think will go???

Its a tragedy of surplus, when you have that many seats with that much pop, you need to keep up your growth. If you grow that tiny bit less, and this is compounded by Cali having to work metaphorically overtime to grow (if CA grows 10% and the nation was previously stagnant, CA only grew 9% and the nation grew 1%) then its far easier to lose seats. On the other hand, its far easier to gains seats if you do match those harsh growth requirements, as shown by the late 20th century redistricting in CA or TX right now.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,222


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 11, 2019, 10:59:22 PM »

MN

If the Ds gain a trifecta

Cut up the metro into 4 equal squares such that each District is Clinton +15 atleast.

Then create a duluth/rochester snake mander that makes a Lean D district.

Then Create a st cloud based R sink west of the metro looking like a C

Then create a larger C district that surrounds the small C

The C gerrymander is only required in the small case Peterson decides to run in 2022 while somehow surviving 2020 otherwise Ds would be better just making a cleaner two districts even if it doesn't affect how many seats each party holds.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2019, 11:10:46 AM »

Well, "cutting" Katko's seat doesn't necessarily mean eliminating a Syracuse-based seat or otherwise chopping up Onondaga County. A Syracuse-Ithaca seat is pretty natural and is unwinnable even for Katko.

Katko won by 13,700 votes in 2018. In 2016, Tompkins County gave Hillary Clinton a margin of 16,000 votes over Trump, with Stein and Johnson taking 3% each. I suppose if Dems take out strong Republican territory to put it in Katko's district, I can see it. The Southern Tier district would have to take in Binghamton from NY-22 and probably even more than that.

Katko actually lost Onondaga county.  If you take out those other counties and replace them with Tompkins or even Oneida, where Brindisi would probably win in an Oneida/Onondaga district, Katko would be finished.
Logged
Tintrlvr
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,286


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2019, 11:46:30 AM »

Well, "cutting" Katko's seat doesn't necessarily mean eliminating a Syracuse-based seat or otherwise chopping up Onondaga County. A Syracuse-Ithaca seat is pretty natural and is unwinnable even for Katko.

Katko won by 13,700 votes in 2018. In 2016, Tompkins County gave Hillary Clinton a margin of 16,000 votes over Trump, with Stein and Johnson taking 3% each. I suppose if Dems take out strong Republican territory to put it in Katko's district, I can see it. The Southern Tier district would have to take in Binghamton from NY-22 and probably even more than that.

It's not just adding Tompkins County and taking nothing away. Wayne County gets dropped from Katko's district, so it's a net swing of 26,000 votes from Trump to Clinton. Katko can't overcome that. As Mr. Phips noted, Katko lost Onondaga County itself in 2018.

It actually results in a split of Binghamton, which isn't great but doesn't scream gerrymander either. You could probably fix that by splitting a different county in a more natural way, like splitting Cayuga County and then taking in Oswego, since the Erie coastline of Cayuga County isn't really connected to Auburn in any meaningful way. I've made some maps to this effect before. But exactly what would have to happen is heavily dependent on the Census figures since the estimates are hard to be sure about. Maybe you could get away without any meaningful splits.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 12, 2019, 12:57:54 PM »

I mean concerning NY, one can get real creative since the state has quite a few districts. For example, here is a 25 seat (upstate) map using one of the many available projections, made back when the state was adjusted downwards. No town cuts, but a wide MOE since this was a projection. I was able to cut old NY-21, rather then 22. That said, the map assumes Brindisi does down in 2020. 25 seat is actually more flexible on the D side, whereas 26 is more flexible for Rs - It has to do with upstate pop relative to the pop south of Westchester. If downstate is underpopulated relative to the total, they have to eat more of Blue Westchester, whereas if upstate is underpopulated, they get more of Westchester.



NY-16 (Light Green) - Nita Lowey: Old PVI - D+7. New PVI: D+8
NY-17 (Royal Blue) - Sean Maloney: Old PVI - R+1. New PVI: D+2
NY-18 (Yellow) - Antonio Delgado & Elise Stefanik: Old PVI R+2. New PVI: D+3
NY-19 (Moss Green) - Paul Tonko: Old PVI: D+7. New PVI: D+6.5
NY-20 (pink) - John Katko Old PVI: D+3. New PVI: R+10
NY-21 (Grey) - Tom Reed Old PVI: R+6. New PVI: R+9
NY-22 (Brown) - Open Old PVI: R+6. New PVI: D+7.5
NY-23 (Seafoam Green) - Joseph Morelle Old PVI: D+8. New PVI: D+7.5
NY-24 (Purple) - Chris Collins or Successor Old PVI: R+11. New PVI: R+13
NY-25 (Peach) - Brian Higgins Old PVI: D+11. New PVI: D+9

The second seat cut has to come from long island, which even under this (small l) liberal assumption, only has the pop for 3.5 districts. NYC is shrinking in some parts, but exploding in others. This also makes the dems task easier, since the current NY-5/6 can expand into Nassau eating near Pub communities like Garden City. A tactful liberation of Islip and Brentwood from NY-02 and then a general redraw probably preserves the 1 D/1 Tossup D that the dems currently hold while merging NY-02/01. Gets easier if King finally retires, since there is no seniority sitting in south Nassau.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 12, 2019, 05:19:23 PM »

RI: For this one, its going to be an AL-District, a battle between Cicilline and Langevin. I would think Cicilline would win this battle, but it would be a tough call.

I would much rather have Langevin in Congress than Cicilline.

Maybe Cicilline can run for governor in 2022 instead (Providence is a repository of terrible politicians, after all).
Logged
Thunder98
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,573
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 12, 2019, 08:45:40 PM »

Zaybay, that's a great summary.

I have questions about a couple of suggestions you made, and they're actually the same question, re: NY-24 and MI-5. Are you imagining Onondaga County and/or Syracuse would be cut in two? I don't see how you avoid having an Onondaga County seat, and thus a Katko seat, especially if NY-22 is already divided up to its east.

Similarly, Gennessee County MI has more than 50% of the population of a Congressional District. This is a problem similar to the Tim Ryan's district problem - can you really get rid of that district without its population center "taking over" whatever district it's combined with? Do you think that they'd pair Flint with Lansing for a revised MI-8? I think a Flint-based legislator wins no matter what. 

For NY, its mostly due to D partisanship that NY-24 is cut up. And its for a rather specific reason, its to get rid of 2 R incumbents with one stone. I believe that, to maximize their seat count, the Ds would draw Katko's base of Syracuse into NY-21, repositioning it to be more D and along the Canadian border. To be honest, I had a hard time figuring out which 2nd seat would be cut up, and thats the best I can come up with.

Its also possible, though not likely, that the second seat deleted is a Long Island seat, but the area has not seen such a decline in population that it would become the area of deletion.

For MI, it would, at first, be a Tim Ryan problem, due to how D Flint is. But the problem is that this area is trending R rapidly, and bleeding profusely. Its a seat that would make its successors tossups for 1 or 2 cycles before becoming R seats.

Of course, these are just my takes on the situation.


If CA loses 1 seat in the 2020 redistricting, Would the Non-Partisan Redistricting Commission make a  bipartisan vote sink district for the GOP or Dem then?
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 12, 2019, 09:33:55 PM »

If CA loses 1 seat in the 2020 redistricting, Would the Non-Partisan Redistricting Commission make a  bipartisan vote sink district for the GOP or Dem then?

I think it's just as likely that the Non-Partisan Redistricting Commission ignores the old lines and draws a new map from scratch than choose 2 districts to merge.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 12, 2019, 09:38:51 PM »

re: New York, thank you I see it now.
Logged
America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS
Solid4096
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,730


Political Matrix
E: -8.88, S: -8.51

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 12, 2019, 09:56:58 PM »

If CA loses 1 seat in the 2020 redistricting, Would the Non-Partisan Redistricting Commission make a  bipartisan vote sink district for the GOP or Dem then?

I think it's just as likely that the Non-Partisan Redistricting Commission ignores the old lines and draws a new map from scratch than choose 2 districts to merge.

Actually, its a certainty that they will go with the former option. Its literally the way the commission is legally set up.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 13, 2019, 01:01:39 AM »

Drawing maps of New York with fewer and fewer districts, is one of the best arguments for expanding the House. It just keeps getting uglier each decade otherwise.
Logged
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,531
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 15, 2019, 11:19:36 AM »


OH: This one is rather tricky. Unless the Dems win control of the State Supreme Court(which would require them to take two seats in the 2020 election, unlikely but possible), the "Commission" would be run by the Republicans. This would mean a good amount of the gerrymandering they had done in 2010 may be sustained. The only problem for Republicans is Columbus. While the entire state has been declining in population, Columbus OH has been experiencing explosive growth, 10%. This has gotten to the point that the Ds may gain a seat in the Columbus area. But anyway, back to the lost seat, there are three possibilities. OH-13, OH-6, and OH-02. For OH-13, its one of the only D districts in the state, but its lost so much population that its now possible to remove the seat entirely. This would be the most partisan choice, but it may have some repercussions in the creation of more tossup/D seats elsewhere. For OH-06, this seat has lost the most pop, and the Rs may see it as the optimal seat to split, reinforcing the rest of the congressional. OH-02 is a similar story, its lost a lot of people, and getting rid of it reinforces the R gerry. But with how OH is, I cannot be confident on any of this.


The legislature actually still gets the first crack at drawing Ohio's congressional maps before the commission steps in.  That's a moot point as far as partisan control goes though.  However, the Republicans can't unilaterally approve any map for more than 4 years.  They need at least some Democratic support somewhere in the process in order to get a 10-year map approved.  The full explanation of the process can be found here: https://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_Ohio

The Democrats aren't going to support anything that doesn't protect their four current incumbents.  I also imagine they will push for at least one if not two additional safe seats. which means in order to get a 10 year map approved the Republicans will have to cut at least two of their own loose.  It's definitely going to be interesting to see what happens.  Gov. DeWine has been on the record in support of non-partisan redistricting so I could see us getting anywhere from a 9-6 (GOP-Dem) map with all seats safe for both parties to a 8-5-2 (GOP-Dem-Toss) map.  No map that gives Republicans 10 or more safe seats is going to last for more than 4 years though.

As for the original question of which seat will get axed, my money is on OH-7 regardless of what type of map gets approved.
Logged
Idaho Conservative
BWP Conservative
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,234
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.00, S: 6.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: March 11, 2019, 05:50:03 AM »

kinda shocking california may lose a seat. which one do y'all think will go???
Probably in LA.  Immigration question could cause latino under-count.
Logged
Lachi
lok1999
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,347
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -1.06, S: -3.02

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: March 11, 2019, 05:58:09 AM »

kinda shocking california may lose a seat. which one do y'all think will go???
Probably in LA.  Immigration question could cause latino under-count.
That question has been ruled unconstitutional, it won't be in the census
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« 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 0.06 seconds with 11 queries.