This map is intended to favor Dems as they control both houses and the governor’s office. I tried to avoid any egregious gerrymanders, and I suspect that some of the suburban Chicago districts could be made more favorable. The only really ugly districts are IL5 (Quigley) and IL9 (Schakowsky). IL5 had to take a pretty strained shape to get a voting-age Hispanic plurality, although it still isn’t nearly as bad as the current Hispanic-majority IL4 (Gutierrez). IL9 had to pick up the vacated IL5 precincts that didn’t have enough Hispanics, as IL7 (Davis) has just a 50.1% voting-age black majority and could not pick anything up.
State map:
Chicago area map:
Notes on districts, with voting-age populations. w = Anglo, b = black, h = Hispanic, a = Asian.
IL1 (blue, Rush): 38.2w-52.1b-7.4h-1.2a. Underpopulated and has to expand to the west. Safe D.
IL2 (green, Jackson): 36.0w-50.8b-11.2h-0.9a. Underpopulated and has to expand to the south to pick up most of Kankakee. The southernmost area is Pembroke, an 85% black semi-rural area which is unusual outside the south. Safe D.
IL3 (purple, Lipinski?): 77.2w-6.1b-8.9h-6.6a. This district has more of the current IL13 (Biggert) than the current IL3, as it really had nowhere else to go. It’s probably competitive. Tossup?
IL4 (red, Gutierrez): 31.3w-6.1b-58.3h-3.6a. One of the ugliest districts in the nation is now one of the cleanest. Safe D.
IL5 (yellow, Quigley): 43.2w-4.8b-44.4h-6.1a. I don’t think it’s possible to draw a second Hispanic-majority district without using really tortured lines. As is I think this proposed district as pushing it as far as “compact” goes, although obviously it isn’t nearly as screwy as the current IL4. Safe D
IL6 (teal, Roskam): 73.3w-3.1b-11.4h-11.1a. It picks up the Palatine and Schaumburg areas, and loses its heavily Hispanic area in the east and some of its western end. It may be slightly more red now, but I know very little about the political leanings of Chicago suburbs. Tilt R?
IL7 (gray, Davis): 31.0w-50.1b-9.8h-7.5a. There probably will not be 3 black-majority districts after 2020. Black plurality, maybe. Safe D.
IL8 (blue-gray, Walsh): 69.2w-6.4b-18.1h-5.1a. Dumps its piece of reddish McHenry county and some Cook suburbs, and picks up Waukegan, much of swingy Kane county, and bluish DeKalb county. This is intended for Melissa Bean to return to DC. Walsh doesn’t live here. Tilt D?
IL9 (toothpaste blue, Schakowsky): 73.1w-6.4b-10.0h-8.7a. Moves south and much more into Chicago proper. Safe D.
IL10 (pink, Dold!): 72.6w-4.1b-8.9h-12.9a. Moves south into IL9’s vacated areas, taking most of the college town of Evanston along with neighboring suburbs that are heavily Asian. This would probably be one of the most Asian districts outside California or Hawaii. The intent is to ensure that Dold! serves one term! Likely D?
IL11 (pea soup green, Kinzinger): 80.1w-5.8b-11.3h-2.0a. Loses some of its eastern end including Kinzinger’s house, picks up northwest Kendall county and some western rural areas. Lean R?
IL12 (light blue, Costello): 80.5w-14.7b-2.4h-1.2a. The St. Louis area district sheds most of its southern end but keeps the college town of Carbondale, and adds Macoupin county and the rest of Madison county. Obama got 57.3% of the two-party vote here. Lean D.
IL13 (pink-gray, Shimkus): 93.5w-3.6b-1.6h-0.5a. Renumbered from IL19. Downstate Republican sink. Safe R.
IL14 (brown-green, Hultgren): 61.4w-5.5b-24.1h-7.9a. Loses most of its western rural areas (which are actually swingy for the most part) and exurbs and picks up the Naperville and Hanover areas. Tossup?
IL15 (orange, Johnson): 80.5w-10.6b-3.0h-4.4a. This is my concept of the “midstate cities swing district” that jsramek mentioned on an earlier Illinois thread. It has Springfield, Decatur, Bloomington-Normal, Champaign, and Danville. Obama got 52.8% of the two-party vote in the 6 counties within the district, although it’s missing some (probably red) rural and exurban areas within these counties. Toss up, but it would likely take a very strong candidate to beat Johnson.
IL16 (garden hose green, Manzullo): 85.9w-2.7b-8.4h-2.0a. The north state Republican “sink”. It picks up the rest of McHenry and loses its western end and the bluest parts of Rockford. Walsh also lives here. Likely R?
IL17 (indigo, Schilling): 82.0w-9.6b-5.7h-1.5a. Moves north from its current fugly-mess configuration to take in purple or blue areas of the state’s northwest, including Peoria and the bluest parts of Rockford. Obama got 58.2% of the two-party vote here without any of Rockford, so his overall share here was probably closer to 60%. Lean D/likely D.
IL18 (yellow, Schock): 94.1w-2.6b-1.9h-0.5a. Mid-state Republican sink. Schock actually lives in IL17 but would probably run here. Likely R/safe R.
Under this map, the Dems would easily hold districts 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 9. They should (finally) take 10 and retake 8 and 17, and Costello shouldn’t have too much trouble in 12. Reeps will hold 13, 16, and 18. Then you have 3, 6, 11, 14, and 15 which appear to all be competitive and all of which could conceivably be held by Republicans. Given that 3, 6, 11, and 14 occupy a contiguous block of western and southwestern suburbs, I suspect it would be possible to draw them such that one of them is lean-R or even likely-R and the other 3 are tossup or tilt-D. (I would leave this for someone who knows more about Chicago-area politics.) As is, I would say this is a 10-3-5 map but probably 11-7 or 12-6.
Thoughts? In particular, thoughts about how the Dems might draw the lines in the western and southwestern Chicago suburbs?
Loading ...
Luis Gutierrez is a liberal north side Puerto-Rican. The 4th CD you have drawn is on the southwest side and is mostly populated by conservative Mexican-Americans.
She could win it though.
I suspect nearly every democratic incumbent would have an absolute fit over this map. That’s one reason I know its pretty good map for the D’s. In IL, however, there is what can be done and will likely be done. Here’s what my crystal ball says
1. Danny Davis AA CD7 would be happy enough with his seat. I suspect, however, that Rush and Jesse Jr. would have a fit with this map. Its not just the decrease in AA % but the increase in white voters plus there are suburban & rural conservative voters. They might disagree with the idea that there is not enough AA voters as there are some left in CD3, CD4, CD5 and CD9. I might add that Davis, Rush and Jackson jr. would all rather some these pockets of AA voters plus more hispanic voters then white conservative voters. I don’t see this configuration suiting them.
2. As to hispanic legislators and Congressman G. They would spit nails under this map. 58% hispanic VAP is not 50% of actual voters. Plus high white voter turnout areas are in CD4. There are stray hispanic voters in CD3 but lipsinki has few D voters to spare and yes CD1, CD2 and CD7 has hispanic areas but that’s aint’t happening. CD5 at 43% hispanic VAP is a joke. The white voters there are twice as likely to vote. There are some stray hispanics in CD7 & CD9 but I don’t see that happening. Plus Quigley is not losing a primary to a hispanic.
3. I suspect Downstate legislators will not be thrilled as it appears to be they lose a seat. CD16 was mostly outstate and now its mostly suburban while CD14 loses its outstate influence. CD11 is mostly downstate now. Downstate lost a seat in 2001 and now it appears they have lost another.
I don’t mean this as criticism as its a great map but I think downstate legislators and some incumbents will balk at a map like this.
It’s possible to to draw a 2nd Hispanic majority district that while I would not call it compact is still better than the current 4th. I drew a district that kind of looks like a sideways T that connects the Hispanic parts of Aurora, Elgin, and West Chicago with the Northern parts of the current 4th. It is 58.4% Hispanic (52.9% VAP).
It doesn’t guarantee a Hispanic Congressman, but it will get their community listened to.
Roguemapper’s map. A 12-6 map should be the minimum Dems in IL should settle for, but they should aim for 13-5.