Tag: State Legislatures

The list, so far:

Here’s a full list of the state legislative chambers flipped by Republicans on Tuesday: Alabama House and Senate, Colorado Senate, Indiana House, Iowa House, Maine House and Senate, Minnesota House and Senate, Michigan House, Montana House, New Hampshire House and Senate, North Carolina House and Senate, Ohio House, Pennsylvania House and Wisconsin House and Senate.

Additionally, the New York state Senate is looking bad.

[cross-posted at DLCC.org]

Late Friday afternoon, Politico’s Ken Vogel published an interesting assessment of the upcoming fight over redistricting.

“GOP lags in early redistricting race” is a broad look at the players in this year’s state-level elections and next year’s map-drawing, as well as at how those organizations fit together.

Yesterday morning's SSP Daily Digest touched on this briefly, but if you don’t have the time to peruse the three-page article at the moment (or even if you do), I thought you might enjoy some selected highlights.

All 80 seats in the lower house of the NJ legislature are up for re-election this year, but the 40 legislative districts (2 assemblymen from each) are so heavily gerrymandered that only a few districts are ever in play. Right now, the Democrats have a 48-32 majority; Republicans must pick up seats in five districts to re-take a majority.

The conventional wisdom here in that Republicans will pick up seats in a few swing districts, but not enough to take control of the Assembly, which has been under Democratic control for years. Further CW is that there’s a “throw-the-bums-out” anti-Democratic sentiment in these swing districts right now.

Probable GOP pickups

There are two districts currently represented by Democrats that will most likely be represented by Republicans next year.

One is the first legislative district (LD1), a South Jersey district comprised of Cape May County and parts of Cumberland and Atlantic Counties. The Shore region has long been one of the most favorable parts of the state for the GOP, and this year this part of the state is the one Christie has a real lock on.

The Democratic incumbents are Assemblymen Matthew Milam and Nelson Albano, and they’re most likely headed for defeat. Instead of their 2007 running mate, popular Sen. Jeff Van Drew, at the top of the ticket, the unpopular Gov. Jon Corzine is – and Christie may win this district by a double-digit margin. If I had to pick one district to flip, this would be it. The GOP nominees are Mike Donohue, an attorney from Dennis Township who was also the GOP nominee in 2007, and John McCann, a businessman who chairs the Ocean City Republican Party and serves on the Cape May County Tax Board. They’re a pair of real wingnuts; they support abolishing – not cutting, abolishing – the state Department of Environmental Protection.

The good news here for the Dems is that they have a huge five-to-one leg up in fundraising, thanks to the powerful South Jersey Democratic machine. Also, even though Milam and Albano don’t have Van Drew’s electoral coattails to rely upon, Van Drew has been out there campaigning like hell for them.

The other seat that’s likely to flip is LD36, where Assemblymen Frederick Scalera and Gary Schaer barely managed to hold onto their seats two years ago. LD36 is a suburban district comprised of most of southern Bergen County, plus Nutley in Essex County and the infamously corrupt city of Passaic in the county of the same name.  

There’s a reason why voters came close to throwing out Scalera and Schaer in 2007.  The pair, especially Schaer, is closely tied to the disastrous EnCap project.  Even though that’s all over with now, and even though the state executive branch is the one that actually mismanaged that project into the ground, Schaer was still one of the original big proponents of the project.  This was enough to rouse constituents to try and teach him a lesson in 2007, and it will be enough in 2009.  Add that together with voter frustration over property taxes, corruption, and Gov. Corzine’s failed affordable housing initiative, and voila! You’ve got a recipe for disaster for Scalera and Schaer.  

This race is going to be very, very close, especially since suburban areas like this one are being sought after by both Christie and Corzine. The GOP nominees are Don Diorio, a school board member and businessman in Carlstadt, and Carmen Pio Costa of Nutley, who manages a real estate investment business.  This is the same ticket that almost unseated the incumbents in 2007, and once again they’re pulling no punches.  They’ve assailed Scalera and Schaer for their support of COAH and Corzine’s tax increases, for their involvement with EnCap, and for their double-dipping tendencies.  (The latter is not unusual for New Jersey politicians, but it’s certainly never something that voters support.  Schaer, for the record, is also the President of the Passaic City Council, while Scalera collected a big, fat second salary for a public job with Essex County for quite some time.  

Other GOP targets

The GOP is also aiming to pick up seats in LD14, the only district represented by different parties in the Senate and Assembly (Sen. Bill Baroni is a Republican). The key in this district is to be pro-labor, because plenty of unionized state workers live in this Central Jersey district, which is fairly close to the state capital.

Assemblyman Wayne DeAngelo and Assemblywoman Linda Greenstein are both very pro-labor, so if there’s a big labor turnout for Corzine, they could be safe. But if there are state workers still smarting over the unpaid furloughs Corzine imposed, GOP nominees Rob Calabro (a member of the Hamilton Planning Board who owns several Mercer County food markets) and Bill Harvey (a general practice attorney) could have a pretty good shot at unseating the incumbents. Interestingly, the Middlesex County GOP is ticked off at the Mercer County GOP because both nominees are from Hamilton, in Mercer County. I’m not sure if that’ll affect the race.

There are two other districts where the GOP has a reasonable possibility of picking up seats. One is LD4, a swingy South Jersey district comprised of parts of Camden and Gloucester Counties. Folks, with a two-to-one Democratic registration advantage, this gerrymandered district is usually dominated by George Norcross and his South Jersey Democratic machine. But people in this suburban district — like people in most other parts of New Jersey — are generally viewing Gov. Corzine negatively. Suddenly the GOP is viewing the LD4 seats as a viable option. The seats are currently occupied by Assemblywoman Sandra Love, who is retiring, and Assemblyman Paul Moriarty, who is running for re-election. Moriarty is maligned by Republicans, who cannot beat his “independent-minded” image in spite of the fact that his voting record is fairly partisan and he’s part of the Norcross machine.

Anyway, Moriarty and his new running mate, a 15-year-veteran of the Gloucester Township School Board named Bill Collins, aren’t facing a typical Republican slate this year. One Republican nominee, Eugene E.T. Lawrence, was a Democrat until earlier this year, when he basically switched parties in order to run in the general election (although his official reason was his anger at Gov. Corzine for cutting property tax rebates). Lawrence, an African-American who spent five years as a Democrat on the Gloucester Township Council before being defeated for re-election, felt snubbed when the Democratic machine picked Collins earlier this year.  In addition to Lawrence, the Republicans have nominated a political neophyte named Dominick DiCicco.  Hailing from Franklin Township, DiCicco has a law degree and an MBA; he works for Zurich Financial Services, currently as Chief Legal Officer of North American Claim Operation.  He’s also got friends in high places, apparently, as former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Newt Gingrich saw fit to endorse him earlier this year.  How many times has Newt Gingrich endorsed someone in a state legislative race?  Not many, I imagine.  

All things considered, Lawrence and DiCicco have a lot to overcome – not just the voter registration edge, but the fundraising might of the Norcross machine, which has out-raised them two-to-one thus far.  Norcross isn’t losing this one if he can help it, but with his slate facing a pair of genuine moderates in an anti-Democratic year, these seats could flip.  

Another such district is LD19, a somewhat urban Middlesex County district including Perth Amboy and Woodbridge.  This district is currently represented by Assemblymen John Wisniewski of Sayreville and Joe Vas of Perth Amboy.  Wisniewski, who’s been elected and re-elected since 1995, is one of the most powerful members of the Assembly, chairing the Transportation/Public Works Committee.  He more recently made the news by flirting with the prospect of seeking the Speakership next year and, humorously, by boasting about the fact that he didn’t accept a bribe from Solomon Dwek, the cooperating witness in this summer’s infamous Operation Bid Rig.  Good for you, John.  

Of course, perhaps I shouldn’t poke fun at Wisniewski when he is so clearly the clean one in this delegation.  After all, Vas (who was concurrently Mayor of Perth Amboy until he lost his re-election bid in 2008) is facing a plethora of corruption charges from both federal and state authorities.  In March 2009, a state grand jury indicted him on eleven counts, including seven counts of official misconduct.   In May 2009, a federal grand jury indicted him on eight counts, including six counts of mail fraud.  Also in May 2009, a second state grand jury indicted Vas on seventeen further counts. And to top it all off, the feds indicted Vas on one more charge in superseding indictment in July. Through all of this, Vas refuses to resign, although he decides not to seek a second term in office.  Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts suspended Vas’s salary and benefits and stripped him of his committee assignments, including his Commerce Committee chairmanship.  Vas still refuses to resign to this very day.  

So the time comes for the Middlesex Democratic machine to pick Vas’s successor, and they give the party line to Jack O’Leary, the longtime mayor of the district’s smallest city, South Amboy.  O’Leary runs unopposed in the primary and appears to be headed for election as the next assemblyman from LD19.  Instead, an anonymously authored 82-page document called “The O’Leary Family Crime Syndicate” began circulating, accusing O’Leary of corruption and targeting the mayor’s insurance business.  O’Leary was investigated by state authorities as well, although he has not been charged with any crime and the attack may very well have been simply a political enemy trying to take him out.  Regardless, O’Leary bowed to intraparty pressure and quit the race in August.

Democratic Party boss/actual elected county sheriff Joe Spicuzzo convened party leaders to vote on who to anoint as the new nominee.  Party leaders voted to put Craig Coughlin on the ticket. Coughlin is a retired municipal judge who’s been municipal attorney for Carteret and Woodbridge, not to mention a South Amboy councilman and a Woodbridge Democratic Party chair. A distinguished resume, no doubt, but one with scarcely any elective office on it. Indeed, instead of a mayor so popular in his hometown that he’s been elected and re-elected to that office for two decades, the Middlesex Dems anointed a party insider with lots of political connections in all the district’s towns but little to no connection to the actual people of the district.

Even though this is a heavily Democratic district (Dems enjoy a 2-1 registration advantage), the corruption problem and, of course, dissatisfaction with Gov. Corzine have given the GOP newfound hope.  One nominee, Richard Piatkowski of Perth Amboy, is a real estate broker probably best known in the political sphere for his run for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2004, when he was the Republican nominee against then-Congressman (and future Senator) Bob Menendez in the heavily Democratic 13th Congressional District.  His running mate, Peter Kothari, is a businessman from Woodbridge who is probably best known as an Indian-American community activist.  (In 2006, Kothari denounced the police and the city of Edison for not prosecuting a police officer who allegedly engaged in police brutality while arresting another Indian-American activist for rioting and assault on a police officer.  That’s not very Republican….) Worst-case scenario from a Democratic perspective:  The GOP picks up these two seats, along with all the others mentioned above.  I wouldn’t put any money on it, though.  

All other seats

All other seats should be safe for the incumbents. Other than LD14 (mentioned above), only LD2 has split representation (represented by a pair of Republicans in the Assembly and a Democratic state senator), but it’s likely safe for the incumbents. Some excessively optimistic Republicans have also made noise about pickups in LD3 and LD6, which frankly is not going to happen.

I should note that there are also two special elections for the Senate going on: One to fill Congressman John Adler’s old seat in a heavily Democratic district and one to fill Congressman Leonard Lance’s old seat in a heavily Republican district. Both are safe for the incumbent party.

NJCentrist lives in a small city in Union County, in central New Jersey. He’s part of the electorate in the 7th congressional district, a swing district represented by moderate Republican Rep. Leonard Lance. He’s also a part of the electorate in the 21st legislative district, a solidly Republican district represented in the State Senate by Senate Minority Leader Tom Kean, Jr., and in the State Assembly by Assembly Minority Whip Jon Bramnick and Assemblywoman Nancy Munoz. Like a majority of Americans, NJCentrist approves of President Obama.

Iowans in House district 90 will elect a new state representative in a special election on September 1, and the Republican candidate appears to be planning to make same-sex marriage a major campaign issue.

The seat opened up when State Representative John Whitaker, a Democrat, accepted a position with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Republicans didn’t even run a candidate against Whitaker in 2008, but Iowa House district 90 has been competitive in the recent past. The southeastern Iowa district contains all of Van Buren County and parts of Wapello and Jefferson counties, including the Fairfield area (home to Maharishi University and the so-called “Silicorn Valley”).

The Democratic candidate for the special election is Curt Hanson, a retired driver’s education teacher who has won various teaching awards. Hanson plans to campaign on bread-and-butter issues: jobs, health care, education, and balancing the budget.

The Republican candidate is Jefferson County supervisor Steve Burgmeier. His name rang a bell for me because the Jefferson County supervisors made a show of posturing against same-sex marriage on April 27, the day the Iowa Supreme Court’s Varnum v Brien ruling went into effect. Burgmeier and his colleagues passed a resolution calling on Iowa legislators to take a stand against same-sex marriage. Since the Iowa Legislature had just adjourned for the year on April 26, the resolution served no purpose other than to put Burgmeier and on record loudly opposing marriage equality. He was probably planning to run for the legislature even before Whitaker’s seat opened up; a Republican Bleeding Heartland commenter had been recruiting Burgmeier to run next year in Iowa Senate district 45 (one of the GOP’s better pickup opportunities in the upper chamber).

Burgmeier’s press release announcing his candidacy for Iowa House district 90 highlighted two issues: cutting government spending and giving Iowans “a right to vote on the definition of marriage.” This is the new politically-correct Republican messaging. Instead of acknowledging that they want to write discrimination into the Iowa Constitution, Republicans say, “Iowans deserve the right to vote” on a marriage amendment, as if we were in the habit of subjecting minority rights to a majority vote in this country.

Republicans would like to win this special election for many reasons, not least to fire up their base about the potential to demagogue against committed same-sex Iowa couples next year. Democrats hold a 56-44 majority in the Iowa House. House Speaker Pat Murphy strongly supported the Varnum v Brien ruling and has made clear he will block efforts to bring a marriage amendment to the House floor.

You can donate to Curt Hanson’s campaign by clicking here. A strong volunteer effort will be crucial in this low-turnout special election, so if you live within striking distance of southeast Iowa, please consider volunteering for Hanson’s campaign before September 1.

This is now Episode 12 of my seemingly never-ending redistricting series. (In reality, it has a definite end — after this diary, there are only 9 states I’m planning to address: California, Washington, New Mexico, Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, Kansas, and Tennessee. The other 15 states are either at-large states, or are unlikely to see substantive boundary changes.)

Today comes Oklahoma and Wisconsin. I struggled with whether to include Oklahoma at all, since my Oklahoma effort is barely different from the current map. But given the fluid partisan dynamics in Sooner State politics, and the potential issue over how to handle the “conservative Democratic” 2nd District, I thought it might be worth a look. On the other hand, I drew two maps for Wisconsin based on the highly changeable atmosphere in that state’s 2010 elections.

Previous efforts:

Diary 1: Massachusetts and Texas

Diary 2: Michigan and Nevada

Diary 3: Iowa and Ohio

Diary 4: Georgia and New Jersey

Diary 5: Florida and Louisiana

Diary 6: Pennsylvania and Utah

Diary 7: Illinois and South Carolina

Diary 8: Indiana, Missouri, and Oregon

Diary 9: Alabama, Arizona, and Kentucky

Diary 10: Colorado and Minnesota

Diary 11: Mississippi and New York

Hark, to the extended text!

Oklahoma

In a few short years, the legislature has gone from an eye-poppingly enduring history of Democratic reign as of 2004 to full GOP takeover by 2008. The governor’s mansion will be open in 2010 as popular Democratic Gov. Brad Henry is term-limited. Fortunately, the Democrats have two strong candidates to retain that office, but Republicans are still even odds at worst for a pickup. So what would GOP control of redistricting mean in 2011? There is only one Democrat in the delegation, the rebellious Dan Boren of the rural (and Native American-heavy) 2nd District. But my gamble is that, even with Republican control, district lines will only be adjusted, and no real effort will be made to dismantle Boren’s territory.

I can’t say my confidence in this prediction is exceedingly high, but look at the signs: even though Tom Coburn won this heavily evangelical, highly socially conservative district for the Republicans as recently as the late 1990s, the GOP has made no effort to target the seat, even when it was open in 2004 (their sacrificial lamb back then lost to Boren 66-34%, and Boren’s two reelections have both topped 70%). Considering Boren racks up urban New England-like Democratic margins in a district that broke 2-to-1 for McCain, and that Oklahoma redistricting has historically revolved around the preservation of culturally cohesive regions, it would seem a dangerous overreach for the GOP to aim its fire at Boren at the risk of softening up less conservative turf around Tulsa and Oklahoma City. Other than completely breaking the traditional boundaries around Eastern Oklahoma, how would they crack his constituency, anyway? And how much worse would it be for Boren to compete for votes in Tulsa than to compete for them in Little Dixie?

So that’s my gamble. And as a result, the differences between this map and the current one are scarcely visible:

There’s not much to even describe here, except that the Oklahoma City-based 5th is contracting in area as the two most rural districts (especially the 3rd) expand.

Wisconsin

As in neighboring Minnesota, circumstances of state politics pushed me to draw two possible maps for America’s Dairyland. The Democrats currently enjoy a redistricting monopoly here, but a tenuous one, with a narrow 52-47 edge in the Assembly, 18-15 in the Senate, and a controversial governor in Jim Doyle. Given the high possibility/probability that any one of these pillars of state power could flip to the Republicans in 2010 (the most likely loss being the governor’s mansion, Doyle’s approval rating hovering in the 30s), it seemed logical to draw a bipartisan compromise map to accompany a hypothetical Democratic gerrymander. Since it would be an incredible feat for the GOP to pick up all three levers in one election cycle, I thought it unnecessary to draw a Republican gerrymander map.

Democratic gerrymander first: this map creates two or three solid Democratic seats, just one solid Republican seat, and as many as five swing seats, all of which would have voted for Obama. Most importantly, it concentrates GOP areas in the 5th and pits two veteran Republican incumbents, Tom Petri of Fond du Lac and Jim Sensenbrenner of Menomonee Falls, against each other. Petri’s 6th is then opened up for Democratic poaching, as is Paul Ryan’s 1st south of Milwaukee. It’s possible Petri could move north and run for the 6th, but when he retired, this iteration would be a prime pickup opportunity. Meanwhile, all five Democratic incumbents are kept about as solid as they were (Kagen gets a very slight boost, though none are pointedly shored up). In toto, a good year under this map might produce a 7-1 Democratic majority; an average year would result in 6-2, and a bad year might retain the standing 5-3 edge, either with the status quo remaining, or with Kagen’s seat traded for Ryan’s.

District 1 – Paul Ryan (R-Janesville) — with all of Kenosha and Racine Counties along with 36% of Milwaukee County, Ryan would face his first truly difficult race in 2012 under these lines (though many think he’ll bail for a gubernatorial try in 2010), and as an open seat this district would be likely to elect a moderate suburban Democrat.

District 2 – Tammy Baldwin (D-Madison) — made only slightly less Democratic to help Dems in the 1st and 3rd.

District 3 – Ron Kind (D-La Crosse) — still somewhat Dem-leaning, as before. The three Dem seats in small town Wisconsin (Kind, Kagen, and Obey) are all only modest Obama districts, but seem to be a bit stronger for their incumbents.

District 4 – Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) — the other 64% of Milwaukee, plus 24% of GOP-friendly Waukesha County; a strong urban Rust Belt Democratic seat.

District 5 – Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Menomonee Falls) vs. Tom Petri (R-Fond du Lac) — geography would seem to favor former Judiciary Chairman Sensenbrenner, and Petri might choose to move north in this scenario, but muddying the waters was clearly my goal. This packs Republican votes as well as can be expected anywhere in Wisconsin.

District 6 (open) — without Petri, this would be a fairly good shot to elect a Democrat, with Obama having performed somewhere in the neighborhood of 51-53%. But much like the current 6th, if Petri ran, it would be on loan to the GOP until his retirement.

District 7 – Dave Obey (D-Wausau) — as chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Obey obviously has nothing to worry about, though Democrats have long noted the fairly marginal nature of the 7th. When he does retire, this will still probably be a somewhat Dem-leaning/Obama-friendly rural seat, but a slam dunk? No.

District 8 – Steve Kagen (D-Appleton) — I only had minimal room to strengthen his district, since most rural Wisconsin counties are competitively balanced, but made the necessary trades to up his chances a bit.

Now the bipartisan compromise map: this adhered to clean, simple, aesthetic district lines and made superficial efforts to help incumbents without going out of its way to do so. The reason I didn’t make an aggressive “incumbent protection” map is that the current lines are fairly incumbent-friendly, especially as Democratic strength has increased in the once-Republican 8th. So my primary goal for this scenario was pretty boundaries, with a dash of Petri, Ryan, and Kagen protection thrown in (for Petri, I had no concerns about his ability to be reelected, but rather about the GOP’s chances of holding the open seat). Needless to say, I’d rather see the Democrats retain control, but at least this map appeases my “good government” instincts.

After a couple-week hiatus, I’m back to Episode 11 of my redistricting series! On tap for tonight’s episode: a magnolia founds the next world empire! Or, rather, I’ve paired two unlikely diary neighbors, New York and Mississippi.

There were a number of people who earlier asked me why I hadn’t yet covered New York, one of the obvious choices for an early redistricting diary. The reason is that back in March I drew a map for NY that assumed Jim Tedisco would win NY-20 and be primed for elimination in 2012. Just tonight I redrew New York to, on the contrary, make the 20th more Democratic to help Murphy (though the news wasn’t all good, and I’ll get to that momentarily).

Previous efforts:

Diary 1: Massachusetts and Texas

Diary 2: Michigan and Nevada

Diary 3: Iowa and Ohio

Diary 4: Georgia and New Jersey

Diary 5: Florida and Louisiana

Diary 6: Pennsylvania and Utah

Diary 7: Illinois and South Carolina

Diary 8: Indiana, Missouri, and Oregon

Diary 9: Alabama, Arizona, and Kentucky

Diary 10: Colorado and Minnesota

The chasm lies below…

Mississippi

With only four districts and a Democratic legislature offset by Republican Gov. Haley Barbour, the goal here was simple: help Travis Childers and make his 1st District considerably more Democratic without noticeably diluting the 2nd (a VRA-protected black-majority district). Much like ArkDem’s Mississippi map from some time ago, mine keeps the 2nd solidly black-majority while moving the needle in the 1st several points in the Democrats’ favor. Unfortunately, there seems to be literally no way to prevent Gene Taylor’s 4th, in 2008 McCain’s strongest district in the state, from eventually flipping to the GOP. The Gulf Coast counties are just too absurdly Republican (little-known fact: Trent Lott represented the 4th not long before Taylor, who won a 1989 special election when Lott’s GOP successor died).

District 1 – Travis Childers (D-Booneville) — the overwhelming Republican nature of Mississippi’s northernmost counties prompted me to make a truly audacious move (hat tip to ArkDem on this) in removing DeSoto County, a major source of GOP votes, from this district and putting it instead with the mostly black, Delta-based 2nd. This district carefully grabs more marginally Republican counties that were previously with the 3rd and some black counties that were in the 2nd without, I think, overreaching. McCain would likely have still won here, but not with 62% as before (since my methods are so low-tech, I can only guesstimate, and I’ll say with only minimal knowledge that this variation of the 1st is probably about 55-57% McCain, enough to keep Childers solid and keep the district well in play for a future Democrat).

District 2 – Bennie Thompson (D-Bolton) — other than its two-county northern reach, this district is heavily Democratic and hopefully at least 60% black, with an Obama percentage somewhere around 63-65%.

District 3 – Gregg Harper (R-Pearl) — once I had set aside most available Democratic turf for Thompson or Childers, and drawn a logical Southern Mississippi seat for Taylor, this constitutes what was left over (hint: a lot of white Republicans, who easily overwhelm the significant minority of black Democrats).

District 4 – Gene Taylor (D-Bay St. Louis) — I hoped against hope that there was a way to bring the McCain share under 60%, even under 65%, but that’s impossible as far as I can tell. Consider this district a loan that can be deferred only as long as Taylor chooses to stay.

New York

Well, then…I had to eliminate one seat (it’s possible the Empire State will lose two, as in the last reapportionment, but all models currently project that its 28th slot will barely be saved). Murphy winning NY-20, much as it thrilled me, put a real monkey wrench in my plans and forced me to start over with the upstate districts, especially since there are a handful of upstate Democrats with marginal districts needing protection (damn all those votes being wasted in the city!). I started my do-over looking for a way to eliminate Pete King without jeopardizing shaky Democratic strength on Long Island…turns out, not a good idea. Population loss is mostly confined to upstate, so any NYC or Long Island seat elimination will cause havoc with the necessarily illogical lines. Simply put, the dropped seat will have to be upstate. If New York ends up dropping two, maybe King can be drawn out.

I tried drawing upstate a few different ways, each messier and more gerrymandered than the last, until deciding to try something a little controversial: put Mike Arcuri at risk. Of course, I started this process wanting to shore up Arcuri, just like Massa, Murphy, Maffei, and Hall, but eventually discovered that his district would be the most difficult to shore up based on pure geography. It’s not hard to move the 20th north, or put a little Rochester into Massa’s district, but with so many narrowly GOP-leaning and swing counties in the middle of the state, helping Arcuri would have been a lot tougher.

So I paired Arcuri with veteran Republican John McHugh in a relatively even-handed district. That may bode ill for Arcuri (whose first reelection in 2008 was shockingly close) against the longtime incumbent from up north, but with Obama likely to again command some coattails in 2012 New York, maybe he has a good shot. On the flip side, McHugh hasn’t faced a tough race in forever and may bow out rather than test his probably rusty survival skills. So my proposed 23rd is a tough call, and Democrats in the legislature might prefer to seek a certain GOP loss, but they’ll be forced to resort to some mighty contortions of mapmaking to derive that result.

Other than that risky move, my other choices were, I think, logically conceived and beneficial to the Democrats. Murphy and Massa are the big winners in this map, as are Hall and Maffei to a lesser degree. It was hard not to spread upstate Dem votes too thin, especially since upstate counties tend to be within 55% one way or the other (unlike the overwhelming Democratic margins in the city), but I think I may have pulled it off, at least as well as I could while equipped with such minimal redistricting tools.

You can’t easily see the urban districts, which is good because I wasn’t able to be very precise with them (what with only a calculator, Excel, and Paint to guide me). In fact, my changes to the NYC and Long Island districts were so minimal that there’s little point to addressing each district individually. Suffice to say that, other than maintaining VRA racial protections, the only “downstate” district I thought carefully about was the 13th, which in my map comprises all of Staten Island plus a small portion of Brooklyn. Beginning at the bottom of the Hudson Valley, then:

District 17 – Eliot Engel (D-Bronx) — stretches from the Bronx to Orange County. I diluted Democratic strength a little bit to help John Hall, but the 17th stays a safe seat.

District 18 – Nita Lowey (D-Harrison) — entirely within Westchester County, safely Democratic.

District 19 – John Hall (D-Dover Plains) — 91% of Dutchess, 28% of Orange, all of Putnam, and 23% of Westchester = Dem-leaning and more clearly Dem-trending suburban/exurban district.

District 20 – Scott Murphy (D-Glens Falls) — altered not just to become more Democratic (and it obviously is, in this iteration) but specifically to strengthen Murphy, by grabbing more of the rural north and dropping most of Saratoga. Perhaps Murphy will do well in Saratoga in 2010, without a regional pol as his opponent, but since Obama’s numbers were stronger up north than in Saratoga anyway, this seemed like a sensible choice.

District 21 – Paul Tonko (D-Albany) — a bit less Democratic, this district still includes all of Albany County but also all of Schenectady and 79% of Saratoga. Tonko would represent three major upstate towns under my map, which may present occasional conflicts of interest, but certainly appeases the “geographical compactness” fetishists.

District 22 – Maurice Hinchey (D-Hurley) — sheds a few Democrats to help Arcuri and Massa, but stays Dem-leaning and reasonably compact. The toughest pill to swallow for Hinchey would be ceding liberal Tompkins County (Ithaca) to Arcuri/McHugh while picking up some moderate Republican turf in the Hudson Valley. This is what I mean about having to balance the interests of different Democrats upstate. Hinchey, and a future Democrat, should still be just fine here.

District 23 – John McHugh (R-Pierrepont Manor) vs. Mike Arcuri (D-Utica) — combines some of McHugh’s rural northern counties (the more Democratic of which were given to Murphy) with Arcuri’s Oneida County base and some overwhelmingly Arcuri-friendly territory down in Ithaca. Knowing McHugh’s moderate reputation, popularity with military interests, and seniority advantage, I went out of my way to give Arcuri a fighting chance. For whatever it’s worth, this district would have voted for Obama, as did both of the current districts — Arcuri’s 24th and McHugh’s 23rd.

District 24 – Dan Maffei (D-Syracuse) — what was involved with this district was more tinkering than careful strategy, as any reasonable take on Maffei’s district will result in something Onondaga County-heavy and Dem-leaning.

District 25 – Chris Lee (R-Clarence) — a true “leftovers” district after I had done everything within reason to put Massa’s 28th in the Obama column while keeping Slaughter and Higgins rock-solid. Other than Chautauqua County and some Buffalo-area neighborhoods, this district should be plenty Republican. And yes, I know some of you would have liked me to eliminate Lee, but there are enough GOP votes in this part of New York that Massa (or Higgins) would have been doomed for defeat under that plan.

District 26 – Brian Higgins (D-Buffalo) — literally stretches from Buffalo to Niagara Falls, for a Rust Belt-ish industrial and Democratic-leaning district.

District 27 – Louise Slaughter (D-Fairport) — much like its current form, this covers most of the “lakeshore curve” in Western New York, stretching east from Niagara Falls to Rochester (about 2/3 of Monroe County is here, with the other third given to Massa, who definitely could use the electoral aid, while Rules Committee Chairwoman Slaughter is safe as can be).

District 28 – Eric Massa (D-Corning) — if this district were a tourism ad, its slogan would be “where West and Central meet”. The Rochester portion of the district likely puts Massa in a much more advantageous position and results in a slightly Obama-supporting district (the current 29th voted for McCain). Monroe County is easily the largest population source, with Ontario, Steuben, Chemung, and Cayuga (88% of which is here) rounding out the top five. Though it’s far from a Democratic stronghold, this district may be my most effective upstate seat in terms of the overall change in its partisan composition.

Overall, this map does what we’d all like in somewhat solidifying a three-seat ceiling for the Republicans (a very bad year might result in defeats for Massa and either Hall or Murphy, but the average year would preserve at least 25 Democratic seats out of 28), one of which is quite vulnerable. More sophisticated technology would doubtlessly allow me to create more precise boundaries and more accurately estimate the partisan dynamics of each district, but given the limited resources I have, I think I did pretty okay.

Thoughts on either state? What else do you want to see from this redistricting series?

I am now on Episode 10 of my redistricting series, if you can believe it! Tonight we cover Colorado and Minnesota. I drew two maps for Minnesota — one if the Republicans hold Tim Pawlenty’s governorship in 2010, and the other if Democrats manage a gerrymandering monopoly. (The Dems have solid state legislative majorities, so that element seems set in stone.)

Previous efforts:

Diary 1: Massachusetts and Texas

Diary 2: Michigan and Nevada

Diary 3: Iowa and Ohio

Diary 4: Georgia and New Jersey

Diary 5: Florida and Louisiana

Diary 6: Pennsylvania and Utah

Diary 7: Illinois and South Carolina

Diary 8: Indiana, Missouri, and Oregon

Diary 9: Alabama, Arizona, and Kentucky

Jump below, if and only if you dare!

Colorado

The process here is fairly straightforward. Whether Democrats hold their current monopoly in 2010 or lose the governor’s mansion (the state legislature seems locked-in), incumbent protection will be the name of the game, aimed especially at solidifying Democratic Reps. Betsy Markey and John Salazar (most pointedly the former). Democrats would be foolish to try for a 6-1 majority and no one seems to think they’ll try it.

My map definitely solidified Markey without hurting DeGette, Polis, or Perlmutter, but it didn’t go as far as I hoped in protecting Salazar (my 3rd remains quite rural and is more of a swing district, but far from strongly Dem-leaning). Given the need to dole out favorable Denver suburbs to Polis, Perlmutter, and Markey, there’s little Denver-area turf left to give Salazar. What to do?

District 1 – Diana DeGette (D-Denver) — all of Denver and 19% of Arapahoe preserves a solidly liberal district.

District 2 – Jared Polis (D-Boulder) — it may look rural and Rocky-heavy on the map, but the population anchors are Boulder County, which is kept whole, and Adams County, of which 35% is included. Less strongly Dem than before, but still plenty safe, with a moderate-liberal bent.

District 3 – John Salazar (D-Manassa) — my disappointment is that I only moved the needle a couple points in Obama’s direction here. It’s still very rural, and competitive in an open seat situation. There are big pockets of population in Grand Junction, Pueblo, and Jefferson County.

District 4 – Betsy Markey (D-Fort Collins) — New and improved for enhanced Democratic performance! 100% of Larimer, 65% of Adams, and 53% of Weld make for a safe district.

District 5 – Doug Lamborn (R-Colorado Springs) — meant to pack Republicans tightly.

District 6 – Mike Coffman (R-Littleton) — ditto in that this low-elevation “Colokansas” district packs GOP votes efficiently. I did cause some mischief by putting Coffman’s home in the 7th.

District 7 – Ed Perlmutter (D-Golden) — decidedly Democratic suburban Denver seat comprising half of Arapahoe and 80% of Jefferson.

Minnesota

This is the first state for which I drew two maps, one a Dem gerrymander and the other a bipartisan compromise map. Since Minnesota is expected to lose a seat for a new total of seven, there were some key differences in how I handled the dropped district (as well as how I drew the urban/suburban Twin Cities seats). Collin Peterson’s new 6th and Jim Oberstar’s new 7th are configured similarly in both maps, with Oberstar’s diluted a bit and Peterson’s shored up a tad to create two mildly Dem-friendly rural districts (though Peterson’s is still tough, especially with its geographical identity changing as population loss forces it to leech toward the Iowa border!).

I will run through the bipartisan map first since Republicans currently hold the gov’s mansion:

District 1 – Tim Walz (D-Mankato) vs. John Kline (R-Lakeville) — honestly, Walz vs. Kline was the only logical, not-too-awkward bipartisan incumbent showdown I could seem to configure. This district would be more or less evenly divided in partisan performance and evenly weighted in population between Walz’s southern base and Kline’s exurban territory.

District 2 – Erik Paulsen (R-Eden Prairie) — this map being the bipartisan variation, Paulsen gets a clearly more Republican district comprising Anoka County, 35% of Hennepin, and 26% of Carver.

District 3 – Betty McCollum (D-St. Paul) — anchored in Ramsey County, safely Democratic.

District 4 – Keith Ellison (D-Minneapolis) — 65% of Hennepin County, and that’s it, for a mostly urban Minneapolis district.

District 5 – Michele Bachmann (R-Stillwater) — I wanted to soak up all the Republicans I could find (and Bachmann will need them if she keeps up this way).

District 6 – Collin Peterson (D-Detroit Lakes) — how to protect Peterson without giving Oberstar an untenable district? Knowing the district would have to extend south, I tried to improve the PVI a bit by taking some rural Dem counties from his neighbor, but not move the needle too dramatically as that would jeopardize the esteemed Transportation & Infrastructure Committee Chairman.

District 7 – Jim Oberstar (D-Chisholm) — more of a swing district than before; Oberstar would be safe but Dems would have to fight for this as an open seat. Is it worth shoring up Peterson’s seat at the cost of making this one equally swingy? I’m no longer convinced.

Overall summary: two safe Dem seats (McCollum and Ellison), two relatively safe GOP seats (Paulsen and Bachmann), two swing seats that would remain safe for their current Dem incumbents (Peterson and Oberstar), one battleground (Walz v. Kline in the 1st).

And now, the hypothetical Democratic gerrymander should luck break our way in the governor’s race (and that certainly didn’t happen in 1990, 1994, 1998, 2002, or 2006, but I suppose the DFL is overdue for some good fortune in this given area):

The two North Country districts certainly don’t look much different, but the other five, I think, would be quite altered under a Democratic plan.

District 1 – Tim Walz (D-Mankato) — this version mostly steers clear of the Twin Cities area and is heavier in small towns and southern counties that know and like Walz. I can’t knowledgeably estimate the presidential numbers here, but assume Obama would have still won, as I pointedly tried to avoid weakening Walz for other Democrats’ benefit.

District 2 – John Kline (R-Lakeville) vs. Michele Bachmann (R-Stillwater) — yay, a chance to eliminate Bachmann! Except that, based purely on factors of geography, media coverage, and name recognition, Bachmann would have a good fighting chance in a Republican primary here. Oh well, at least it’s an eliminated GOP seat.

District 3 – Erik Paulsen (R-Eden Prairie) — given how hard it will be to shore up Collin Peterson land without undermining Oberstar’s Iron Range seat, you can bet the Democrats would milk the Twin Cities for every vote they’re worth, and that means messing with Paulsen. Here his district comprises 58% of Anoka, 20% of Dakota, and 42% of Hennepin, for a moderately Dem-leaning/Obama-friendly suburban seat.

District 4 – Betty McCollum (D-St. Paul) — Give and take, give and take. So the 4th gets diluted a bit as it suburbanizes; it’s still plenty solid, but doesn’t waste votes as before.

District 5 – Keith Ellison (D-Minneapolis) — extends into Anoka County to hurt Paulsen but remains liberal and overwhelmingly Democratic.

District 6 – Collin Peterson (D-Detroit Lakes) — not a heck of a lot different than in the bipartisan map.

District 7 – Jim Oberstar (D-Chisholm) — ditto.

This map only includes one super-safe GOP seat, two very safe Dem seats, three swing seats that would be strong for their Dem incumbents (Walz, Peterson, Oberstar), and one swing seat that would be vulnerable to ousting its GOP incumbent (Paulsen).

Thoughts on either state are much appreciated!

Here is Episode 9 of my never-ending redistricting series, in which I cover three states (Alabama, Arizona, and Kentucky) with little in common demographically other than all voting for John McCain.

Previous efforts:

Diary 1: Massachusetts and Texas

Diary 2: Michigan and Nevada

Diary 3: Iowa and Ohio

Diary 4: Georgia and New Jersey

Diary 5: Florida and Louisiana

Diary 6: Pennsylvania and Utah

Diary 7: Illinois and South Carolina

Diary 8: Indiana, Missouri, and Oregon

Jump below!

Note that Arizona was originally intended to share a diary with New York, but the delay in the NY-20 election has forced me to put off a final New York plan (if Tedisco wins, my NY map applies, but if Murphy pulls it out in the final count, I need a do-over).

Alabama

The overriding goals here were clear, and are regardless of which party wins the governor’s mansion in 2010. Either a Republican or Democratic Governor will contend with a legislature controlled by conservative Democrats, and so protecting Rep. Bobby Bright of Montgomery will be Priority #1 (a major flaw in my reasoning here: if Bright loses to a Republican in 2010, a very real possibility, the 2nd will be preserved more or less as-is or made more Republican to accommodate the hypothetical freshman GOPer). Anyway, I assumed Bright survives 2010 and is the big winner from redistricting. As a direct result of protecting Bright, another winner is made clear, Republican Mike Rogers of Anniston (his district was carved to elect a Democrat in 2002 and, well, that didn’t work out, so for the sake of helping Bright, Rogers will get more favorable turf).

The other districts weren’t altered much; Artur Davis’ VRA-protected 7th was made a tad less heavily African-American but should still be about 60% so, keeping it clear from controversy, and the other four seats barely change at all in partisan or racial composition.

District 1 – Jo Bonner (R-Mobile) — heavily Republican Gulf Coast districts stays mostly unchanged.

District 2 – Bobby Bright (D-Montgomery) — again, this map assumes he survives in 2010. Race tracking closely with partisan behavior in this state, the obvious tack was to boost the 2nd’s black population, so I dumped the district’s southernmost counties and anchored it in the eastern half of Alabama’s Black Belt, with the main population band stretching from Selma almost to the Georgia border, adding an arm up in Talladega.

District 3 – Mike Rogers (R-Anniston) — Rogers would now represent the only clear gerrymander in the state, and its lines are, I assure you, only as ugly as they are for a good purpose: I had to connect the heavily Republican counties northeast of Talladega with the heavily Republican counties bordering Florida’s Panhandle, so that meant creating a skinny north-south band along the Georgia line, in counties that were otherwise reserved for Bright. It’s unaesthetic, yes, but it gets the job done, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see legislative Democrats and Republicans agree on a plan like this for the mutual benefit of helping both Bright and Rogers.

District 4 – Robert Aderholt (R-Haleyville) — heavily Republican Appalachia-Tuscaloosa-exurban Birmingham mix.

District 5 – Parker Griffith (D-Huntsville) — as before, it’s socially conservative and mostly white, but with a good bench of local Democrats. Unlike Bright’s district, the 5th couldn’t be shored up much since there are no African-American areas nearby that aren’t necessary to keep the 7th VRA-protected.

District 6 – Spencer Bachus (R-Vestavia Hills) — meant to soak up every possible Republican between Birmingham and Montgomery.

District 7 – Artur Davis’ (D-Birmingham) replacement — Davis is running for Governor in 2010, but whichever Democrat succeeds him will retain a black-majority district anchored in Birmingham, Tuscaloosa, and the heavily black counties of western Alabama.

Arizona

The nonpartisan redistricting commission typically seeks to draw districts with geographical communities of interest in mind, and does little or nothing to protect incumbents. This means we shouldn’t expect a plan that explicitly shores up any of the three marginal Democratic districts (the rural 1st, suburban 5th, or mixed urban-rural 8th). While the 2001 plan created a new Hispanic-majority district for the Democrats and a competitive new rural seat (dubbed the 1st), I found that 2011’s map is due for a GOP seat in the suburban/exurban Phoenix area, based in fast-growing Pinal County. Since Arizona will be gaining two seats, the other may be of a less predictable nature, though everyone expects that it, too, will be based in metro Phoenix. My proposed 10th is a mixed Phoenix district with a considerable Hispanic population (one problem: said Hispanic pop. under my plan may be big enough to move the VRA-protected 7th out of majority-Hispanic status, which would be a non-starter).

One thing that made my numbers less-than-perfect was the lack of reliable data on Hopi Reservation population in northern Arizona (Hopi and Navajo areas are kept in separate districts due to traditional tensions between the two tribes). I used rough statistical guesstimates to separate the reservations into the 2nd and 1st, respectively. This, and my lack of certainty regarding the Hispanic percentage in Grijalva’s 7th District in this map, are the two potential demographic issues present here (and note that I used 2007 Census estimates, before 2008 numbers were available, making the data already obsolete).

All those caveats aside, I think the general spirit of Arizona’s next district map is present here:

District 1 – Ann Kirkpatrick (D-Flagstaff) — still rural with the highest Native American population in the state. Personally, as someone who is admittedly ignorant about Hopi/Navajo history, I think it unfortunate that the tribes insist on being separated, since moving the Hopi reservation into this district would put its Native population over 25% and possibly close to 30%, a clear VRA opportunity when coupled with the district’s Hispanic and other minority populations.

District 2 – Trent Franks (R-Glendale) — though it appears rural, this district is a lot more Maricopa County-heavy than one might assume.

District 3 – John Shadegg (R-Phoenix) — Republican neighborhoods of Phoenix and suburban Maricopa County keep Shadegg in the clear, for the near future at least.

District 4 – Ed Pastor (D-Phoenix) — combines the Latino neighborhoods of Phoenix to remain a strong VRA seat.

District 5 – Harry Mitchell (D-Tempe) — as before, this comprises traditionally Republican Phoenix suburbs that are trending the other way with time. In Mitchell’s current 5th, Obama garnered a respectable 47%, though I haven’t a clue how he would have fared in my 5th since my method is so low-tech and crude.

District 6 – Jeff Flake (R-Mesa) — weary though I am of this guy and his precious privileged resolutions, this 6th would stay safe for him.

District 7 – Raúl Grijalva (D-Tucson) — if the Hispanic pop. is under 50-55% in this proposed Maricopa-free iteration (and it may indeed be), then it is worth a reconfiguration, this time using 2008 stats. Regardless how accurate my map may or may not be, the commission will ensure a VRA majority-Hispanic seat for Grijalva.

District 8 – Gabrielle Giffords (D-Tucson) — now very Tucson-dominated and free of Hispanic-majority Santa Cruz County.

The new District 9 – anchored in Pinal County with significant chunks of Maricopa and Pima for a Republican-leaning suburban/exurban seat between Phoenix and Tucson.

The new District 10 – entirely within southwest Maricopa County, possibly Hispanic opportunity (but cannot dilute the Hispanic pop. in District 7, so I question whether the commission would draw something quite like this…I’m a bit more certain of the rough boundaries for a new GOP seat in District 9).

This being a commission-run redistricting process, no incumbents are deliberately protected, and only logic, geography, and racial consideration go into the process. It’s a double-edged sword, really, but makes a private citizen’s map-making simulation much simpler (no gerrymandering to help Congressman X, that is). Other than my possible trespass in District 7, I’m not aware of any probable controversy with boundaries roughly akin to these.

Kentucky

Like Alabama, the process here is likely to be split between the parties, and Democrats are assured a strong hand by holding both the governor’s mansion and the House. Even if redistricting is delayed after the 2011 elections and a Republican is elected Governor, the Democratic House majority seems too large to overcome in a couple cycles, making it likely that Rep. Ben Chandler (D-Versailles) will be protected (and that, of course, assumes he doesn’t run for another office in 2010 or 2011). Making Chandler’s 6th a tad more Democratic for future insurance was the only clear priority of this map, which otherwise leaves lines mostly unaltered.

District 1 – Ed Whitfield (R-Hopkinsville) — expands in area due to lagging population growth, but remains strongly Republican and mostly rural or “small town”.

District 2 – Brett Guthrie (R-Bowling Green) — changes only minimally, remains GOP-friendly with several pockets of urban population and (somewhat outnumbered) Democratic votes.

District 3 – John Yarmuth (D-Louisville) — comprises 99.7% of Jefferson County, and that’s it. Talk about simple!

District 4 – Geoff Davis (R-Hebron) — looks virtually identical to its prior incarnation as an Ohio River-based, heavily GOP district.

District 5 – Hal Rogers (R-Somerset) — heavily rural and Republican, possibly the most socially conservative seat in Kentucky, but drops some traditionally Dem areas for the 6th’s benefit, picking up the slack elsewhere.

District 6 – Ben Chandler (D-Versailles) — McCain won Chandler’s current 6th 55-43 but the incumbent is very popular and is likely unbeatable. Still, he has long held statewide ambitions, and one of these days he will vacate for bigger things, making it a priority for House Democrats and the Governor to shore up the 6th for a future Democratic candidate. Thus, an equestrian-heavy Central Kentucky seat is reconfigured as a Frankfort-Lexington-coal mines district with stronger Dem history. McCain may still have won here, but not with more than 51-53%, making it that much easier for a future Dem to win.

Other states I hope to cover soon include: Colorado, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and West Virginia. There are some key states (among them, California, Minnesota, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin) that could or will require two maps each based on different hypothetical outcomes regarding seat distribution or partisan control. It isn’t clear what the seat count will be in California, North Carolina, or Washington, and in the other four states, partisan control of redistricting is utterly up in the air between now and after the 2010 elections. So most likely, these states will be those that I cover last.

This, Episode 8 of my never-ending redistricting series, is a diary of firsts. It is the first time I have covered three states instead of the customary two (the reason being that I was pairing a larger state with a smaller one, and this diary covers three mid-sized states), and the first time I have covered a state not expected to either gain or lose seats in the next reapportionment (Indiana, which should hold even at 9 seats).

Previous efforts:

Diary 1: Massachusetts and Texas

Diary 2: Michigan and Nevada

Diary 3: Iowa and Ohio

Diary 4: Georgia and New Jersey

Diary 5: Florida and Louisiana

Diary 6: Pennsylvania and Utah

Diary 7: Illinois and South Carolina

Jump below!

First, why these three states? Well, they are three states of contrast. Number-crunchers anticipate that Oregon will gain a seat, Missouri lose one, and Indiana hold even after the 2010 Census and resulting reapportionment. (I should note that Oregon and Missouri are both on the fringes; a slowdown of Midwest-West migration in the next year could easily keep both at their current sizes, preventing Oregon from hitting 6 seats and saving Missouri from dropping its 9th spot). Further, the map in Oregon is likely to be drawn by Democrats, in Indiana by Republicans, and in Missouri through bipartisan negotiation (Republicans dominate the legislature, but the Governor is Democrat Jay Nixon, and his veto authority should force a relatively incumbent-friendly map).

First, Indiana

As if the redistricting process weren’t already enough of an ego-driven, virulently partisan power grab in most states, Indiana makes it worse; even though the Democrats run the state House, Republicans are almost assured to ram through a GOP-friendly gerrymander. This is because Indiana gives the legislature two ways to go about drawing maps: the chambers can work together to pass a consensus map (since the Senate is in GOP hands and the House under Dem control, this would likely mean incumbent protection), or if one party has both the governor’s mansion and one chamber of the legislature, that party has the power to draw the maps regardless of who runs the other chamber. This is a unique provision, from what I can tell, and not one of which I particularly approve (why have two chambers if one of them can bypass the other by dealing with its own party’s governor?). But at least you can’t accuse the Republicans alone of abusing it; Democrats rammed through their own map in 2001, which a large part of why Joe Donnelly and Brad Ellsworth are now in Congress. Since GOP leaders in the Senate are unlikely to want a feel-good compromise after seeing the Dems get their way last round, I’m counting on the most aggressive possible GOP map in the state.

The good news is this: the Democrats have three marginal districts, and because of trends in the state, I believe the Republicans can only dismantle two. Who are the unlucky two? As I see things, they are Donnelly and Baron Hill. (I don’t remember which poster here on SwingStateProject originally suggested such a situation to me, but whoever you are, I now think you’re 100% right!)

“What?”, the astute SSP junkie is thinking. “Obama won IN-02 easily and tied in IN-09…why wouldn’t they go after Ellsworth, whose district McCain won by a modest margin?”

The answer is two-pronged: first, wrecking Donnelly’s seat is not that hard, even if Northern Indiana does lean Democratic nowadays. Dem votes can easily be packed into Pete Visclosky’s already-safe and very slow-growing district, leaving the 2nd District a lot more Republican and small town/rural-dominated. But in Southern Indiana, there is enough Democratic support between the 8th and 9th Districts that both cannot reasonably be cracked. Between Obama nearly winning the 9th, and doing respectably in the 8th, an effective gerrymander will ruin Dem chances in one seat while packing blue-leaning counties into the other. The reason for solidifying Ellsworth and targeting Hill? Ellsworth has a proven track record of hugely over-performing the Democratic base vote, while Hill’s bipartisan popularity is less established. That, and many of the Dem-friendly cities in the region (Terre Haute, Evansville, Bloomington) fit better geographically in the 8th. I believe Republicans see Ellsworth as more capable of surviving an unfriendly map than Hill, which is why they will do the unthinkable by effectively ceding (for the next few cycles, anyway, or as long as Indiana remains a closely-divided state) the famed Bloody 8th to the Democrats.

Here’s what I see in the cards:

District 1 – Pete Visclosky (D-Merrillville) — with all of Lake and Porter Counties, and nearly half of LaPorte, this is a quintessential Democratic seat along the lakeshore.

District 2 – Joe Donnelly (D-Granger) — outside of Dem-leaning St. Joseph County being intact, there’s little for Donnelly to like about this district. The Obama vote is still probably in the mid-40s here, but no doubt this is would be a Republican seat in most election cycles. Donnelly should take a serious look at statewide office if he gets dealt a hand like this.

District 3 – Mark Souder (R-Fort Wayne) — solid GOP seat centered on Allen County.

District 4 – Steve Buyer (R-Monticello) — I thought of diluting this hyper-GOP district a bit to hurt Ellsworth but realized that the lines would start to get bizarre and that, as mentioned in the intro, there are too many Democrats in western and southern Indiana to be cracked up without influencing at least one district.

District 5 – Dan Burton (R-Indianapolis) — I think the current lines in this district are silly and prefer my more compact version, still safely Republican but not so “stretchy”.

District 6 – Mike Pence (R-Columbus) — to help the odious Pence just a tad (he doesn’t need much), I gave Obama-supporting Madison County to Burton to split up the swingy/moderately Dem-friendly Anderson/Muncie/Richmond area between two GOP districts.

District 7 – André Carson (D-Indianapolis) — entirely within Marion County, as before, and still strongly Democratic.

District 8 – Brad Ellsworth (D-Evansville) — all Ellsworth seems to need to win easily is the combined electoral power of Terre Haute and Evansville, so putting on my bizarro world GOP thinking cap, knowing that it would be easier to dislodge Hill, I attempted to give Ellsworth an actual Democratic seat, one that would have voted for Obama. The coup de grâce, both for packing the 8th with Democrats and for cracking the 9th, was the addition of Monroe County (Bloomington) with its Obama-crazed college students. For a Republican mapmaker, making Ellsworth Congressman-for-life is a small price to pay for winning back the 9th (possibly with Mr. Déjà Vu himself, Mike Sodrel).

District 9 – Baron Hill (D-Seymour) — He is likely toast as these lines are drawn, since his tougher battles (2002, 2004, 2006) were all made or broken by Dem GOTV in Bloomington. While the district lacked Bloomington back in its 1990s iteration, southeast Indiana was also very accustomed to Lee Hamilton back then, and Hill was clearly the beneficiary of some lingering Hamilton popularity both in 1998 and 2000. As for this take on the 9th, a couple of its Ohio River counties are traditionally Democratic, but the district is more rural and conservative than ever before, so conditions would be just right for Sodrel to finally triumph after losing three of his last four races against the venerable Hill. With a district this unfriendly, Hill might also consider statewide office. He ran respectably against Dan Coats in 1990…and Richard Lugar will be 80 years old in 2012. I’m just saying!

While this map is bad from a Dem standpoint, its worst possible scenario is a 6-3 GOP edge, not as bad as the 7-2 delegation seen between 2004 and 2006. Back then we fretted about the real possibility of 8-1, given Julia Carson’s repeated underwhelming performance in the 7th…thanks to Indianapolis turning deep blue and most of southern Indiana moving into swing territory (with some clear Democratic strongholds), 6-3 seems bad in the context of Indiana circa 2009. So, from a broad perspective, Obama genuinely changed the game for the Democratic Party in Hoosierland. And who knows…by 2012, maybe even this unfriendly version of the 2nd District could be held.

Missouri

With a GOP legislature and a Dem Governor, this is an entirely different story. The Show Me State should shed a seat if projections are accurate, but actually surprised demographers a bit by growing sufficiently between 2007 and 2008 to regain a notional loss from 2006. So it wouldn’t be too odd if Missouri rebounded enough before the 2010 Census to barely hang on to that 9th seat, possibly depriving a state like Oregon, Washington, North Carolina, or Texas from adding another.

The real question for me was which districts to combine. With power balanced between the parties, it was obvious that one Republican and one Democrat had to face off in a “fair fight” district, leading to an obvious solution: a suburban St. Louis seat forcing Todd Akin (R) and Russ Carnahan (D) together. I tried to draw a district that would be as close to 50-50 as possible for this purpose, knowing the legislature won’t draw anything too friendly for Carnahan’s south-of-the-city base, and that Gov. Nixon would balk at a map too heavy in Akin’s northern suburbs.

The other problem in Missouri was what to do with Ike Skelton’s (D) heavily Republican district spanning the rural areas between Kansas City and Columbia. I figured that a bipartisan plan means incumbent protection, and the Democrats know Skelton will be 81 when the 113th Congress convenes and is not far from retirement. I thus drew a swing district stretching from the close-in Kansas City suburbs to college town Columbia that would not only easily reelect Skelton, but provide a future Dem with a decent shot at holding the 4th District.

I do have one question, though, about this: Missouri redistricting authority was split in 2001, with a Democratic Governor and House, and a narrowly GOP-controlled Senate. Bipartisan plans almost always help incumbents; why on earth didn’t Skelton get a stronger district then? Perhaps mapmakers knew he would be around for the duration of the decade, and didn’t care to gerrymander more friendly territory for future insurance?

Anyway, other than eliminating a St. Louis seat and shoring up the 4th, this map doesn’t do a lot else of interest. As a result of Blaine Luetkemeyer’s inconvenient choice of residence in Miller County, and Ike Skelton’s wholesale capture of Boone County, the 6th is unaesthetic, but the other districts are reasonably shaped.

District 1 – William “Lacy” Clay, Jr. (D-St. Louis) — all of the city of St. Louis as well as 39% of St. Louis County. VRA-protected as a black-majority seat, so if my lines don’t fit those guidelines, ignore them and assume I preserved an African-American majority here.

District 2 – Todd Akin (R-Town and Country) vs. Russ Carnahan (D-St. Louis) — I realize Carnahan lives in St. Louis itself, but compactness suggests keeping the city whole in District 1, so he’d do well to move to the county. The remaining 61% of decidedly Democratic St. Louis County is here, along with 37% of Akin-friendly St. Charles, so clearly I was aiming for a swing seat either man could win.

District 3 – Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-St. Elizabeth) — the loss of Dem-leaning Boone County is counteracted by the addition of most of Jefferson County, but overall the district favors a Republican, ideally from the greater St. Louis area.

District 4 – Ike Skelton (D-Lexington) — you can’t imagine what it took to get a swing seat out of this territory without violating population equality laws! I don’t know why legislators didn’t try to protect the 4th for future Democrats back in 2001, but with Skelton’s exit from Capitol Hill just a cycle or two away, now is the time to dramatically reshape the 4th’s boundaries, whether the rurally inclined Armed Services chairman likes it or not. Between the competitive counties north of Kansas City and the Dem base in Columbia, this district could actually be held when Skelton retires, unlike the current Charlie Stenholm-like rural monstrosity he represents. If Skelton announces his retirement ahead of redistricting in 2011-12, there’s actually a good chance the district will be eliminated entirely, but without that foresight I had to attempt a genuine shoring-up.

District 5 – Emanuel Cleaver (D-Kansas City) — I’m proud that I was able to help “blueify” the 4th while respecting the ideal of compactness in putting Jackson County whole in the 5th. It would have been a lazy solution to split Kansas City itself between the districts, and so I did otherwise, while still moving the 4th’s PVI a good 10 points more Democratic.

District 6 – Sam Graves (R-Tarkio) — because Skelton picks up its Kansas City burbs, this is now a big blob of rural Missouri goodness, as heavily Republican as ever.

District 7 – Roy Blunt (R-Strafford) or his 2010 replacement — still the heavily evangelical southwest Missouri seat, the most conservative district in the state.

District 8 – Jo Ann Emerson (R-Cape Girardeau) — other than a couple exurban St. Louis-area counties, this district is dominated by small towns and is safely Republican.

So there would be four safe Republican seats, two safe Democratic seats, and two swing seats (one of them safe for an incumbent Democrat as long as he chooses to run). Believe it or not, this is probably the closest thing to a Dem-friendly map one could get from today’s Missouri legislature.

Finally, Oregon

While Democrats must defend the governor’s mansion and both chambers of the state legislature in 2010, observers tend to agree that they have the upper hand to retain the monopoly heading into redistricting, giving them the opportunity to decide how to configure the state’s likely new seat. The only problem is that Dem strength is already more or less maximized, with a lopsided 4-1 delegation in a 57-40 Obama state.

Is it realistic to try for 5-1, or should Democrats aim to protect what they have and concede a likely 4-2 split? I initially thought that the latter solution was inescapable, but upon crunching the numbers myself, concluded that it was possible (if risky) to carve five Dem-leaning seats and one ultra-Republican district.

Under my plan, one of the five seats could, however, easily switch to the GOP in an unfriendly election cycle. In a downright terrible year like 1994, two easily would. But in a generic stalemate election year, a 1998 or 2000 sort of situation, and certainly in a Democratic wave year like 2006 or 2008, 5-1 would be the expected outcome.

I weakened both Portland incumbents, David Wu and Earl Blumenauer, to help Kurt Schrader and allow for the creation of a new Dem (or swing, at worst) seat based in Washington County. As notanothersonofabush pointed out, diluting Blumenauer’s district may not have been the greatest idea considering his staunchly liberal voting record, but with a strong Portland base mostly intact, he should be okay under my map.

While Greg Walden would probably choose to run in the über-Republican 2nd I drew, I did choose to mess with him a bit too by putting his home, in heavily Democratic Hood River County, in Blumenauer’s 3rd. All in a day’s work…

District 1 – David Wu (D-Portland) — The 37% of Multnomah County included dominates, with 50% of Marion County serving as a secondary population anchor. I wanted to give Wu as diluted a Dem-leaning district as possible given the need to milk every last precinct in Oregon redistricting.

District 2 – Greg Walden (R-Hood River) — Move, Congressman, and get yourself life tenure in Congress under my plan. Medford/Ashland is the only obvious source of Democratic strength anywhere in this vast rural seat.

District 3 – Earl Blumenauer (D-Portland) — I’m actually a little worried about Blumenauer, one of my personal favorites in Congress, in this map. With 31% of Multnomah along with Hood River and Wasco Counties, he should have enough of a Dem base to win, but might he be too progressive for this district? Splitting Portland three ways was meant to “spread the love” and help Schrader, while splitting the more conservative areas around Salem was meant to do the opposite (“share the pain” to lessen its influence), but have I diluted Democratic numbers out of Multnomah too much to give them power in all three districts?

District 4 – Pete DeFazio (D-Springfield) — Lane County is intact and the conservative reaches of southern Oregon are gone; even the solid liberal that seeks to succeed DeFazio some years down the road will be safe here.

District 5 – Kurt Schrader (D-Canby) — oddly, I probably made it safer than Blumenauer’s district by drawing a district for Schrader that stretches from Lincoln County/Corvallis to Portland. Knowing what I know now, I might not have gone so out of my way to shore up the 5th and instead work to prevent extreme dilution of the 3rd and its Portland base.

And the new District 6 – Washington County and 27% of Clackamas — this is designed to elect a moderate Washington County Democrat; it should be the swingiest of the five Dem seats, but with a narrow yet distinct lean akin to the 3rd’s. Oregonians will be more familiar with the local bench than I.

At the very least, this admittedly flawed map creates five districts that voted for Obama and one that packs McCain votes. But Obama performance does not necessarily equate to Democratic performance at the congressional level. The 3rd, and especially the 6th, could be disposed to a charismatic, moderate Republican in certain cases. The good news is that the entire West Coast from Puget Sound to San Diego has been trending liberal for the past 20 or so years and is getting less and less tolerant of even the most likable Republican candidates. Thus time is working against the viability of GOP candidates in traditional “swing districts” in a state like Oregon, and assuming Democrats retain control of the redistricting process, they will have an unprecedented chance to get aggressive in the Beaver State (even if the legislature deadlocks with the governor on forming a plan, the Secretary of State, Democrat Kate Brown, is authorized to draw her own map). So before too long, even my arguably marginal 3rd and 6th Districts should be out of reach for GOP contenders.

Here is Episode 7 in my redistricting series. Episode 7 was meant to be Arizona & New York, but with NY-20 undecided and likely to be for a time, I thought it was time to press ahead with other states I’ve drawn. So here we have it: the Land of Lincoln and the founding state of the Confederacy, wrapped together at last in one diary!

Previously covered:

Diary 1: Massachusetts and Texas

Diary 2: Michigan and Nevada

Diary 3: Iowa and Ohio

Diary 4: Georgia and New Jersey

Diary 5: Florida and Louisiana

Diary 6: Pennsylvania and Utah

Jump below to read what I was doing at 3:00 AM last night!

Illinois

First, the basics about Illinois: the Democrats control the redistricting trifecta and, I believe, still will after 2010. The state should lose a seat for a total House delegation of 18; though the current slowdown in migration may just save the state its 19th spot, most number-crunchers believe Illinois will just miss out on holding steady.

With Democrats in control of the process, I got to draw my first bona fide hypothetical Democratic gerrymander for 2011. The first key was to ensure that the lost seat was a Republican one, and since this decade, it looks like Chicago will suffer the loss rather than downstate, I chose the ever-frustrating Mark Kirk of Highland Park. His district is cracked in this map between the new seats of Melissa Bean (D-Barrington) and Jan Schakowsky (D-Evanston), both of which would decidedly favor Democratic incumbents. Kirk’s home would be in Schakowsky’s district, FWIW.

Knowing the dangers of overreaching or “getting too greedy” in gerrymandering, I don’t believe Democrats will or should go after every last GOP seat in metro Chicago, particularly with the need to protect Bean, Bill Foster (D-Geneva), and Debbie Halvorson (D-Crete). So I pushed Foster and Halvorson into Cook County and made their districts more compact/urban/suburban and less sprawling. While Obama’s popularity in his home state makes it very easy to put GOP incumbents in “Obama districts”, that kind of thinking all too easily leads to spreading Dem votes thinly and often backfires.

From this map, Democrats can expect a 12-6 majority, with an outside shot at 13-5. Which district did I soften up? Actually, Aaron Schock’s downstate…making his district more competitive was fairly easy compared to the tortuous work that would be required to dislodge Peter Roskam while protecting Foster, Halvorson, and Bean.

Voilà:

By the way, don’t pay too much attention to my boundaries in the urban Chicago districts; the granularity at this level is absurd, and I drew these boundaries crudely, since I’m using Paint and a calculator rather than any real redistricting technology.

District 1 – Bobby Rush (D-Chicago) — VRA black-majority, South Side.

District 2 – Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-Chicago) — VRA black-majority, South Side.

District 3 – Dan Lipinski (D-Western Springs) — entirely within Cook County, working- and middle-class close-in Chicago suburbs.

District 4 – Luis Gutierrez (D-Chicago) — VRA Hispanic-majority, takes in the heavily Latino areas of Chicago, Cicero, etc.

District 5 – Vacant — the North Side seat should be rock-solid for Quigley or any other Democrat.

District 6 – Peter Roskam (R-Wheaton) — entirely within DuPage County, Obama-supporting but traditionally Republican. Believe me, as one of Tammy Duckworth’s most active volunteers in 2006, I would have loved to draw Roskam a district he can’t win, but couldn’t find a way to do so without endangering Foster and Halvorson, and in partisan gerrymanders, safety comes first.

District 7 – Danny Davis (D-Chicago) — VRA black-majority seat: downtown Chicago, Oak Park, Maywood, etc.

District 8 – Melissa Bean (D-Barrington) — dominated by its 64% portion of Lake County, but takes in 5% of Cook to help Bean a bit.

District 9 – Jan Schakowsky (D-Evanston) vs. Mark Kirk (R-Highland Park) — the remaining 36% of Lake (including Kirk’s home base) and 9% of Cook (which dominates population-wise). With Schakowsky’s North Shore base intact and stronger numerically than Kirk’s turf in southern Lake County, I’d feel good about our chances in a match-up.

District 10 – Debbie Halvorson (D-Crete) — all of Will and a tiny, heavily black South Side portion of Cook is meant to protect Halvorson by allowing her to shed all that GOP-leaning exurban country to the west.

District 11 – Jerry Costello (D-Belleville) — the most Democratic downstate district, centered on metropolitan St. Louis and other traditionally Democratic areas like Carbondale. I caused a little mischief by putting John Shimkus’ home in this district, though I think he’d do well to move to the 18th since Costello would be a solid fit here.

District 12 – Judy Biggert (R-Hinsdale) — this monster reminds me of Lamar Smith’s 1990s district in Texas, designed to grab every possible Republican voter for the sake of Democratic incumbents in the area. This comprises the southern 23% of DuPage, 6% of Kane, 62% of Kankakee, and exurban counties DeKalb, Grundy, Kendall, LaSalle, and Lee, dramatically reshaping the district to remove GOP areas that would otherwise be represented by Foster and Halvorson. In a way, having one sprawling seat like this makes more sense than the previous incarnation that had Foster and Halvorson writhing all over the place in positively serpentine fashion.

District 13 – Bill Foster (D-Geneva) — 94% of Kane (Foster’s base) and 5% of Cook (to push his district bluer) = the likelihood of holding this seat when Foster retires.

District 14 – Timothy Johnson (R-Urbana) — other than Johnson’s native Champaign County, this could be the state’s most Republican district; if not, it’s nearly as much so as Shimkus’. Why make Johnson so overwhelmingly safe? Well, I was interested in weakening Schock a bit (or a lot), and it seemed logical to pack Republicans into Johnson’s district due to pure geography. Also, if I was going to help solidify a GOP seat, why not reward Johnson’s relative sanity compared to people like Schock?

District 15 – Donald Manzullo (R-Egan) — due to growth up there, Manzullo’s district becomes more compact and probably remains Obama-supporting, though I suspect it tilts quite Republican in most years.

District 16 – Phil Hare (D-Rock Island) — I’ve always disliked the current 17th and its embarrassingly gerrymandered lines, so sought to clean it up without hurting Hare. By losing its southern “Springfield leg”, it took in some normally GOP-leaning counties in the northwest, though the Obama numbers are probably better than before due to Obama’s superb performance in even exurban and rural northern Illinois. This is now something of a north-south Mississippi River seat, but should still favor a Moline-area Democrat.

District 17 – Aaron Schock (R-Peoria) — To hurt one GOP incumbent without rendering the must-protect Chicago-area Democrats, Schock was an obvious choice: he’s young, new, and rather obnoxious. This district still leans Republican, but is a heck of a lot more moderate, anchored by the Peoria area, Springfield, and Bloomington-Normal, with a small sliver of Champaign County. This district would have voted for Obama, and Schock would be vulnerable to a strong challenge from a conservative Democrat. Without hurting Hare and Costello, that’s the best I could do.

District 18 – John Shimkus (R-Collinsville) would run here — As I said, his home would be represented by Costello, but he’d choose to run here, a very strong GOP seat with only traces of moderation (Springfield and Decatur, mostly).

Overall, I have mixed feelings about this map. I think I handled the Chicago area fairly well (and after all, I did live there for four years), not overextending Democratic strength by getting greedy about Roskam or Biggert. I’m decently happy with my downstate reconfiguration, but am curious if Hare would still be safe enough. Obviously no Democratic gerrymander would result in a much-weakened seat for Hare, so perhaps I should have preserved Springfield and Decatur for him (then again, northwest Illinois needs to go somewhere!).

Anyway, an average year would result in a 12-6 split under this map, and a good year could see 13-5 should Schock fall. What about a bad year? Do you think Hare, Foster, Bean, and Halvorson would all be fine in a difficult year? Input needed!

South Carolina

And now for something completely different: this Deep Southern state experienced the highest domestic migration rate in the nation between 2007 and 2008. Monopolized by Republicans, I sought to draw a GOP gerrymander here that would protect the four current Republican seats and add a new one, while weakening John Spratt (D-York) if at all possible.

Knowing how Republicans love to pack minority votes, I drew Majority Whip Jim Clyburn the most heavily African-American district imaginable. It looks like a crab, actually, and yes, it’s exactly the kind of racial gerrymander Republicans would draw (interesting that we saw so many Democratic maps in the South that aimed for maximizing black representation thrown out by the courts as “racial gerrymanders” in the 1990s, but recent Republican racial packing in states like Florida and Texas has gone unnoticed).

One nit: with the state’s black population around 30%, the Justice Department might want a map that creates two VRA black-majority seats (two seats out of seven = 29%). That would involve diluting Clyburn’s seat a little and trading some turf with Spratt, rendering Spratt’s district a lot safer.

But I presumed only one VRA seat, so with that in mind:

District 1 – Henry Brown (R-Hanahan) — More compact and less coastal than Brown’s current district, it loses Charleston to aid him and prevent a future close call like he faced in 2008 from Linda Ketner.

District 2 – Joe Wilson (R-Springdale) — Heavily Republican, takes the white areas around Columbia from Clyburn, acting as a sort of Alabama 4th to Clyburn’s Alabama 7th.

District 3 – Gresham Barrett (R-Westminster) — also heavily Republican, with the cleanest lines I could possibly draw.

District 4 – Bob Inglis (R-Travelers Rest) — due to growth in the Greenville/Spartanburg area, this district is getting positively small!

District 5 – John Spratt (D-York) — while carving out GOP turf for Brown, Inglis, and Barrett, I tried my best to keep Spratt’s seat potentially GOP-friendly should he retire. But if the Justice Department demands two VRA seats, this could turn out very differently, with Spratt getting a solid Dem district for the first time in recent memory.

District 6 – Jim Clyburn (D-Columbia) — dominated by Columbia, taking every possible black-majority county. Truly a lawsuit-worthy gerrymander, but Republicans seem to get away with those (look at how the courts have reacted to Corrine Brown’s FL-03 versus their decisions in the 1990s about Cynthia McKinney’s GA-11, Cleo Fields’ LA-04, and Mel Watt’s NC-12).

The new District 7 – Designed for a Charleston/Beaufort County Republican due to growth along the coast. This seat would be GOP-friendly but trending Dem long-term and might need to be reconfigured in 2021 to stave off Democratic gains.

Overall, Republicans could hope for a 6-1 majority when Spratt retires, but in the mean time would have to settle for 5-2. When Spratt does go, the coast may be blue enough for a Democrat to win either District 1 or District 7. And if the state creates a new VRA seat, Republicans will make it Spratt’s to avoid ceding more territory. I do wonder how that map would look…

EDIT: It was brought to my attention that the current 5th is as heavily Democratic as any VRA district, and is essentially wasting votes. So I adjusted the lines a bit based on someone’s suggestion to create two skinny DuPage-Cook mix districts; the 5th would be Quigley land, and the 6th would be a more Democratic seat for Roskam. Thus this map could easily produce 13-5, not counting Schock.

Someone else suggested softening up Lipinski, but since that district is already somewhat socially conservative, and doesn’t link easily with Roskam’s, I chose to leave it alone. The 5th is needlessly packed in the current map, while the 3rd is significantly less solid. Here’s the adjusted map:

Which one do you folks like better? In this version, Roskam’s district has about 415K from DuPage and 301K from Cook, while Quigley’s district has precisely reversed numbers.