Month: January 2011

• CT-Sen: Murphmentum! Rep. Chris Murphy, in the race to replace Joe Lieberman, seems to have a sizable early edge in both the primary and general elections, at least according to his internal poll from the Gotham Research Group (with a Jan. 3-5 sample period, so pre-Murphy’s campaign launch and pre-Lieberman’s retirement). In the primary, he leads a two-way race against Susan Bysiewicz, 40-31. In the general, he leads Linda McMahon 54-35 and leads Rob Simmons 46-34 (which is quite the testament to McMahon’s toxicity). The spread on the primary numbers is close to the 47-35 mystery poll that was widely mentioned on Murphy’s announcement day, although the Murphy campaign reiterates that that poll wasn’t theirs.

• MN-Sen: Norm Coleman (currently heading American Action Network, who were big players on the dark money front in 2010) is saying that he’s not ruling out another run for office, although couching that by saying he’s enjoying being out of the news on a regular basis. No indication what he wants to run for, though.

• MO-Sen: Here’s one more name to add to the list for Missouri… or to add back to the list, after briefly being off the list while the pursued the chairmanship of the RNC. Ann Wagner, a former ambassador to Luxembourg, former RNC vice-chair, and former campaign manager to Roy Blunt (can’t get much more GOP establishment than that resume), is publicly weighing the race again. (She says she’d defer to Jim Talent, though, but that’s looking less likely.) And here’s an early endorsement for Ed Martin, the former MO-03 candidate who’s emerging as something of the tea party favorite in the field, if he decides to run; he got the endorsement of Phyllis Schlafly, Missouri-based 80s right-wing icon who still has a lot of pull in social conservative circles.

• OH-Sen: Rep. Jim Jordan is back in the news for saying that he’s “leaning against” a run against Sherrod Brown. If I recall correctly, he’s been “leaning against” the race for months, so things don’t seem to have changed much here.

• LA-Gov: Louisiana Democrats seem to be turning their attention toward something that’s previously eluded them: a potentially willing candidate to go up against Bobby Jindal. Former SoS Al Ater, well-regarded for getting the state electoral system back in gear after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, still sounds pretty noncommittal, perhaps most about the idea of spending his own money on the race (self-financing seems to be the Dems’ main criteria for the race, and while Ater has money, he doesn’t sound happy about spending much of it).

• IA-03: Christie Vilsack is seemingly moving toward a run for the House in 2012, meeting with donors and labor leaders to lay some groundwork. This seems strange, though, because all three of the state’s House Dems say they’re running for re-election, including 77-year-old Leonard Boswell. (Vilsack would be likeliest to run in the 3rd, or whatever the Des Moines-area district will be called once redistricting happens.) She won’t make a formal decision until April, when the new four-district redistricting maps will be unveiled, but for now it looks like, unless she’s going to run against Steve King, there’s a collision course with an existing Dem.

• Chicago mayor: Fresh off a surprising setback in the Illinois Appellate Court, which reversed lower court rulings that he was a Chicago resident and eligible to become mayor, Rahm Emanuel has appealed to the state Supreme Court; they’ve announced they’ll hear the case on an expedited basis, with no oral arguments, so we should be out of limbo pretty soon. There was a brief period where it looked like the city was going to go ahead and start printing ballots without Emanuel’s name (which would basically be the kiss of death), but also today, a stay was ordered that pushes back the ballot printing until the case is fully decided. Also, in case you though this was all just about a legitimate case of differences in statutory interpretation, with grownups disagreeing about what an inadequately-specific law means, guess again. (Forget it, Jake. It’s Chicago.) It turns out that two of the three Appellate Court judges on the case were slated by the 14th district Alderman Edward Burke, a local powerbroker who’s a staunch Emanuel rival and a key Gery Chico backer. This leads to the question of whether supreme court justice Anne Burke, who may have a certain loyalty to Edward seeing as how she’s married to him, will recuse herself from the Emanuel case.

• Omaha mayor: There’s one special election on tap today: a recall election in Omaha, against mayor Jim Suttle. There’s no scandal or malfeasance alleged, just anger about over usual teabagger grievances like “excessive taxes, broken promises, and union deals,” as well as the unspoken obvious: while it’s an ostensibly nonpartisan job, Suttle’s a Democrat. (Omaha seems particularly trigger-happy about recalls; Mike Boyle was successfully recalled in 1987.)

• Senate: Somehow it doesn’t seem unusual, but what George Allen is attempting (and what Jim Talent could attempt, too) is, in fact, highly unusual. Only five Senators have lost re-election and then come back to the Senate… but most of them (Slade Gorton most recently) were elected to their state’s other Senate seat. What Allen is doing is even more unusual: defeating the guy who beat you six years ago in order to reclaim your seat seems to have happened all of once in history. Thanks to UMN’s Smart Politics, it looks like the one time was in 1934, when Rhode Island Democrat Peter Gerry (the great-grandson of Elbridge Gerry, in case you’re wondering) beat one-term Republican Felix Hebert, who had knocked him out in the GOP tsunami of 1928.

• DGA: The Democratic Governor’s Association announced its new hires for the cycle, including the Patriot Majority’s Dan Sena as its political director. We’re especially happy to see their new hire for communication director: friend-to-the-site Lis Smith, last seen on Ted Strickland’s campaign.

• Redistricting: There’s some redistricting-related drama looming in New York, where the Senate Republicans are backing away from promises of a non-partisan redistricting map. Andrew Cuomo has signaled that he’d veto any map that wasn’t non-partisan, but is now suggesting he can negotiate on that, in exchange for other priorities. There was also a smaller battle in Georgia, won by Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle (who, in his role as Senate president, got to reassert his authority over the process), where the stakes are lower since the GOP controls the trifecta. The battle was against Senate president pro tem Tommie Williams… Williams is from the south (unlike Nathan Deal, Cagle, and the House speaker, all from the north) and has a stake in keeping the underpopulated southern part of the state’s interests represented at the table.

One of the big question marks for redistricting is Florida, where the initiative that passed, limiting gerrymandering, still has to run the gauntlet in the courts; the GOP in the state House are joining the suit against the initiative that was filed jointly by Mario Diaz-Balart and Corrine Brown (not surprising that they’d support it, since the GOP controls the trifecta and the legislature would get to resume gerrymandering if it’s struck down). Finally, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette takes a look at Pennsylvania redistricting prospects, concluding (rightly, in my estimation) that the axe is likely to fall in the southwest corner of the state because of its stagnant population, and suggesting that the likeliest removal from the House will be the loser of a Jason Altmire/Mark Critz mashup.

The problem: Democrats are going into redistricting with a 22-18 advantage in the Virginia State Senate. They have to either hold on to 21 of those seats or carve out new seats that they can win. The question is, can they succeed? I’ve tried my best to come up with a map that gives Democrats a good chance at holding their majority.

State Map

Click for bigger view.

As you can see, it ain’t pretty. I attempted to maintain as much population equality as possible, trying to keep districts under 1,000 population variance; with districts that are targeted around 194,000 people, this is well within the normal variance allowed for state legislative districts. The Democrats may be able to massage the numbers some more than I was willing to try. To compare, you can see the 2007 results and existing Senate districts at the Virginia Public Access Project.

We’ll start in Southwestern Virginia and work our way around the state.

SD-40, incumbent: William Wampler Jr. (R)

Not much you can do with this part of the state. It’s pretty much the same as the existing district, except expanded a bit to the east to up the population.

SD-38, incumbent: Phil Puckett (D)

Believe it or not, Puckett went unopposed in 2007. Given the extreme shift away from the Democrats that this part of the state has undergone in the past couple years, I can’t imagine that will be the case this year. Again, there’s not much you can do here; the best I could do was stretch the district out to pull in Radford from SD-22.

SD-20, incumbent: Roscoe Reynolds (D)

Reynolds did have an opponent in 2007, but trounced him. I tried to help him out by putting Danville into the district, along with some parts of Pittsylvania County that have a high African-American population. The district’s black population is 25%.

SD-21, incumbent: John Edwards (D)

No, not that John Edwards. This is the one safe Democratic district this far south, as it contains Montgomery County, Roanoke, and not much else.

SD-22, incumbent: Ralph Smith (R)

Smith knocked off the incumbent in a primary in 2007, then barely beat the Democratic candidate. Rather than try to replicate that feat (because, quite frankly, if they couldn’t win it in 2007, they’re not going to win it in 2011), I just dumped all of the Roanoke suburbs into the district, so it will be safe for the Republicans.

SD-23, incumbents: Steve Newman (R), William Stanley (R)

A district had to be eliminated and spirited off to Northern Virginia, and the obvious choice is the existing 19th, as it has some Dem-friendly parts that can be appended to the 20th, and Stanley is the junior-most Senator, having just been elected this month. This is an extremely Republican district consisting of a rural swath of land between Lynchburg and Roanoke.

SD-15, incumbent: Frank Ruff (R)

Another very Republican district dominated by Lynchburg and Amherst County. It stretches down to the North Carolina border because Ruff lives in the very southeastern tip of the district.

On to Southside and Richmond…

SD-13, incumbent: none

This is where the Democrats need to get creative. The 13th used to be Republican Fred Quayle’s district, stretching from Portsmouth to Hopewell; I’ve created a district to replace it centered in Emporia, Petersburg, and the Southside counties with high black populations. In fact, this district is very narrowly majority-black (50.2%). It should be a prime pickup opportunity for the Democrats.

SD-11, incumbent: Stephen Martin (R) (possibly)

Martin’s residence is just listed as “Chesterfield County” on Wikipedia, and there’s nothing on his campaign website that says where in the county he lives, but this is the district he would run in. It’s a solidly Republican district that takes in Amelia and Nottoway Counties as well as part of Chesterfield.

SD-10, incumbent: John Watkins (R)

Watkins does live in this district. It’s another solidly-Republican suburban Richmond district.

SD-12, incumbent: Walter Stosch (R) (possibly)

Again, Stosch is just listed as being in Henrico County, which is chopped up between four districts. This is an attempt to create as Dem-friendly a district as possible. It’s still a Republican-leaning district, but it’s more likely a 55-45 district than the 60-40 district it is now.

SD-16, incumbent: Henry Marsh (D)

Marsh’s district was drawn to soak up as many black voters as possible. I’ve dropped it down to 51% black, as it loses the southern end of the district, including Petersburg. Still safe Dem.

SD-9, incumbent: Don McEachin (D)

This one loses part of Richmond and gains more of Henrico. Still majority-black, at 52%, and safe Dem.

Now we’re on to my part of the state, Hampton Roads.

SD-1, incumbent: John Miller (D)

Miller barely beat a nutcase back in 2007, so he really needs a better district. I axed the Poquoson/York/Hampton part of the district, gave him all of Newport News, and ran the district up to Williamsburg and across the James River to Surry/Sussex/Franklin. It should make his district much less Republican.

SD-2, incumbent: Mamie Locke (D)

Locke’s district consists of all of Hampton and the southern end of Newport News. Remains majority-black at 53%. Safe Dem.

SD-18, incumbent: Louise Lucas (D)

Maintains the African-American majority (53% black) without the ridiculous stretched-across-a-third-of-the-state shape that it has currently. Most of Portsmouth and part of Suffolk.

SD-5, incumbent: Yvonne Miller (D)

Another majority-black district; it’s the minority-heavy parts of Norfolk, Chespeake, and a few precincts from Virginia Beach. 55% black, safe Dem.

SD-6, incumbent: Ralph Northam (D)

Northam’s district is the white-majority half of Norfolk, the Eastern Shore, and one or two precincts in Virginia Beach. It’s 27% black. Should be pretty safe for Northam.

SD-7, incumbent: Frank Wagner (R) (possibly)

Wagner may or may not live here, I have no idea. He’s somewhere in Virginia Beach. This was an attempt to create as Dem-friendly a district as you can get in Virginia Beach. It’s certainly more diverse than the city at-large; it’s 60% white, 23% black, 7% Asian, and 7% Hispanic. It would still be an uphill climb for a Democrat to win here, but it is at least possible.

SD-8, incumbent: Jeff McWaters (R)

I’m pretty sure McWaters lives here, though. It’s the very Republican Virginia Beach/Chesapeake district.

SD-14, incumbent: Harry Blevins (R) (possibly), Fred Quayle (R)

Again, Blevins lives in Chesapeake, but I have no idea where. Quayle lives in Suffolk, but he’s probably retiring regardless of how the map looks, so that doesn’t matter. This district takes in the white parts of Chesapeake, Suffolk, Portsmouth, as well as parts of Sussex, Southampton, and Isle of Wight Counties. It should be a pretty Republican district.

Okay, that was a lot. Let’s move on to the Tidewater area.

SD-3, incumbent: Tommy Norment (R)

Norment gets a district consisting of a swath of Republican areas between Newport News and the Northern Neck.

SD-4, incumbent: Ryan McDougle (R)

This district actually shrinks, which is a good thing, because it contains some swing counties that I needed for the 17th. It’s centered in the Hanover County exurbs, which are bright-red.

SD-17, incumbent: Edd Houck (D)

A ridiculous snake of a district that attempts to shore up Houck as much as possible. He lives in Spotsylvania, and it stretches from Culpeper in the northwest down to King & Queen and Essex Counties in the southeast.

SD-28, incumbent: Richard Stuart (R)

Northern Neck to Stafford. Actually shrinks, since it used to go all the way up to Fauquier. Should remain in Republican hands; Del. Al Pollard would be about the only candidate to make it competitive, and he lost when the seat was open in 2007.

Okay, two more regions to go. First is the Shenandoah Valley.

SD-25, incumbent: Creigh Deeds (D)

The Deeds district. Pretty much the same as before, should remain safe Dem, as the population is centered in Albemarle/Charlottesville.

SD-24, incumbent: Emmett Hanger (R)

Not much changes here; still a heavily Republican district in Augusta/Rockingham.

SD-26, incumbent: Mark Obenshain (R)

Same as above. Stretches up to Frederick County to pull some territory out of the 27th.

SD-27, incumbent: Jill Holtzman Vogel (R)

JHV narrowly won in 2007, but she’ll be happy with this district; it cuts out the parts that she didn’t win that year (Loudoun and Clarke Counties and Winchester).

And finally, here’s Northern Virginia.

SD-19, incumbent: none

A new district formed out of parts of the 27th and 33rd. The parts from the 27th were won by the Democratic candidate, Karen Schultz. It also takes in the southern end of the 33rd. This is a winnable district for Democrats, but it would likely depend on the candidate quality and the climate.

SD-33, incumbent: Mark Herring (D)

Herring’s district is reconfigured to span Leesburg to Sterling, and Herring should be pretty happy with that.

SD-29, incumbent: Chuck Colgan (D)

Colgan is expected to retire, and I can’t say that’s a whole lot you can do with his district. The areas around Manassas are the most Dem-friendly parts of the old district, but with Del. Jackson Miller, a Manassas native, a likely candidate for the seat, it’s going to be tough for Democrats to hold it.

SD-36, incumbent: Toddy Puller (D)

Puller’s district remains one that stretches from Mt. Vernon to southern Prince William County.

SD-39, incumbent: George Barker (D)

After the 29th, this is probably the most vulnerable district in NoVa. I tried to strengthen it by running it up to inner Fairfax. It might just be a good idea to give up on the 29th and put as much of Prince William in that district, while making the 39th a mostly-Fairfax district.

SD-37, incumbent: Dave Marsden (D)

Marsden’s district, as currently drawn, is intended to be as polarized as possible. Redrawn, it’s centered around Marsden’s home of Burke, so it will be much safer for him.

SD-34, incumbent: Chap Petersen (D)

Chap lives in Fairfax City, and should have little trouble holding down this district.

SD-32, incumbent: Janet Howell (D)

Howell’s district currently stretches from Reston, through Great Falls, and into McLean. This district stretches from Reston around to the southwestern edge of the county. It might be somewhat less Democratic now, but someone’s got to take those Republican precincts.

SD-31, incumbent: Mary Margaret Whipple (D)

This district is currently mostly Arlington, but I decided to stretch it out to Great Falls. You’d think you could unpack these districts more, but it’s tough when all the surrounding territory is Democratic.

SD-30, incumbent: Patsy Ticer (D)

Arlington/Alexandria, probably the most Democratic district in this map.

SD-35, incumbent: Dick Saslaw (D) (possibly)

Saslaw lives somewhere in Fairfax, but where, I don’t know. It may require some precinct swapping to get him in this district. Either way, it’s safe.

So there you have it. I’m not sure if I can answer my question, because there are a lot of variables in play here. The Democrats’ majority is hanging by a thread, and there are a lot of Democrats in tough districts (at least as currently drawn). It’s going to be interesting to see how they proceed.

The key difficulty in drawing up target lists of potentially vulnerable House Republicans is, of course, redistricting. It’s simply hard for us to know what most districts will look like come 2012. But some seats simply can’t or won’t change too much, whether by virtue of geography, politics, law or custom. I’m thinking, for instance, that the 2012 edition of Charlie Bass’s NH-02 is unlikely to look very different from the 2010 version – and that Bass will be his usual weaksauce self, all but inviting a top-tier challenge. And Bass’s next-door neighbor, the corrupt Frank Guinta, will probably wind up in the same boat.

These can’t be the only two guys to make our early lists, though. Who else do you think will have a pretty stable district, and ought to face some trouble?

• CT-Sen, CT-Gov: OK, we can probably scratch Republican ex-Ambassador and rich guy Tom Foley from the list of likely Republican candidates for Joe Lieberman’s Senate seat, if only by virtue of the fact that he’s rhetorically moving himself up to the front of the line for the 2014 gubernatorial race (which would be a rematch against Dan Malloy). He says he’ll keep intact his political operation from last time, where he lost narrowly. Meanwhile, I can’t see this ever becoming reality, but a little wish-listing can’t hurt: Connecticut liberals are already starting a draft movement to get the newly-available Keith Olbermann to think about running for the Senate seat.

• MI-Sen: The idea of Saul Anuzis (the state’s former GOP party chair, and recent RNC election loser) stepping out from behind the curtain and running for Senate still seems a little odd, but it sounds like he’s moving that way, dropping more public statements of interest and apparently polling the field now too. Meanwhile, this isn’t really Senate related unless Debbie Stabenow mysteriously decided to retire and a Dem replacement was needed (and even then it probably isn’t a good idea, considering how unpopular she became), but ex-Gov. Jennifer Granholm says she’s permanently done with politics and moving on to academia with a new position at UC-Berkeley’s school of public policy.

• MO-Sen: Ed Martin (whose main claim to fame is that he lost in MO-03 last year) has been doing everything he can to stay in the public eye, and it seems there’s a method to his madness: he seems to be moving more decisively toward a Senate run. That seems a likely route toward getting flattened by someone known statewide like Jim Talent or Sarah Steelman, but he probably figures he has a couple advantages: one, if Talent doesn’t run, Martin would be the only GOP primary candidate from the state’s largest media market (St. Louis), and two, Martin is tight with the state’s tea party grassroots, and while the Beltway astroturf types like the Club for Growth are big on Steelman, the actual teabagger boots on the ground have a lot of antipathy toward Steelman and are looking elsewhere.

• NJ-Sen: There are lots of politicians who are able to get away with having one penis reference in their names, but it seems like too much to overcome for someone with two penis references in his name. At any rate, New York Jets owner Woody Johnson is considering the race, although insiders concede he isn’t likely to go for it. Johnson has been a major Republican donor for years, and, as of yesterday, has some more time on his hands to consider the race.

• NV-Sen: More signs that John Ensign is moving full speed ahead on running for re-election: he’s convened a meeting of his re-election steering committee for Feb. 1. The invitation for the meeting (to be held at the NRSC) comes from his main fundraisers (indicating that, yes, he still has fundraisers working for him).

• VA-Sen: I suppose George Allen making it official that he’s running for Senate is big news, but we’ve known this for a week; it’s gotten so meta that there have been leaks about upcoming leaks about his candidacy. At any rate, he actually sent out his official e-mail announcement to supporters today and unveiled a new fully operational website for his Senate campaign. Jim Webb’s folks simply say that Webb’s decision about whether or not to run for another term will happen sometime “this quarter.”

• KY-Gov: When Jefferson Co. Clerk Bobbie Holsclaw started making noises about running for the GOP nomination in Kentucky, I assumed she was trying to leverage her way into getting the field cleared for her for a lower statewide office, but it looks like she’s actually following through on her long shot gubernatorial bid, which pits her in the primary against establishment fave David Williams and tea party-backed businessman Phil Moffett. Filing deadlines in Kentucky are tomorrow, so the field looks pretty set. (Dem incumbent Steve Beshear has only some token opposition in the Dem primary, and I’m not making this up: scrap metal dealer Otis Hensley.)

• MS-Gov: Even if SoS Delbert Hosemann doesn’t follow through on rumored plans to run for Governor, we’ll still have at least one candidate with a name that seems to have emerged straight from a Faulkner novel: Pearl River County Supervisor Hudson Holliday. He officially joined the field in the GOP primary, where he seems like he’ll be the third wheel against Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant and businessman Dave Dennis.

• NH-Gov: We already have a poll out of the Republican primary field in the 2012 gubernatorial race, from a never-heard-of-’em-before firm called Strategic National. It looks like Ovide Lamontagne, if he’s interested, may get a second whack at the governorship (remember he was the 1996 candidate, before falling off the map for a long time before re-emerging to almost win the 2010 GOP Senate primary); he leads the field at 37, with losing ’10 candidate John Stephen at 14, state Sen. and ex-Rep. Jeb Bradley at 13, and Manchester mayor Ted Gatsas at 4.

• CT-05: Here are a few more Republican names that have bubbled up, that might get into the field in the now-open seat in the 5th, beyond the obvious re-run from state Sen. Jim Sam Caligiuri. Both the losers in the 2010 primary are also likely to run again, ex-Rob Simmons aide Justin Bernier and rich guy Mark Greenberg. State Sen. Andrew Roraback is also saying he’s interested, while another state Sen., Rob Kane, is sounding pretty lukewarm about it.

• MI-09: Ex-state Rep. Rocky Raczkowski says he’s planning on a rematch against Rep. Gary Peters, after losing narrowly in 2010. However, Raczkowski openly realizes he has some potential problems there (that go beyond his own weaknesses as a candidate): Peters may not have a district left to run in, either. With Michigan losing a seat, Republicans controlling the process, the bulk of the state’s depopulation happening in the Detroit area, and the probable need to keep having two Detroit-area VRA seats, Peters is the likeliest target. (On the other hand, Peters could find himself drawn into a seat stretching across Detroit’s northern suburbs with Sandy Levin, which might prompt the elderly Levin to retire, and that seat probably would be much more Dem-friendly than Peters’ old seat.)

• NY-25: This strikes us as a disappointing move, given that he defended his progressive voting record pretty strongly during his campaign (although, unfortunately, most strongly in his concession statement): ex-Rep. Dan Maffei has taken a position with post-partisan centrist group Third Way. (Although, if nothing else, it points to the paucity of truly left-leaning think tanks and non-profits where Dems can park themselves and stay engaged within the Beltway for several years; there’s no shortage of Heritages and Catos on the right, but this may have been the best option Maffei could find.) No indication on whether Maffei intends to make a 2012 rematch (although he’ll probably want to wait to see whether the 25th winds up being the upstate district that gets chopped).

• UT-02: This may give a clue to the GOP’s plans for redistricting (where their choices are to create four GOP seats in what may risk being a dummymander, or to decide to tolerate Jim Matheson’s continued existence and create a Dem vote sink for him to strengthen their other districts). Incoming state GOP chair Thomas Wright has two goals for the cycle: raise $1 million, and beat “that rascal Jim Matheson.” (At least he didn’t call him a scalawag or a mugwump. Them’s fightin’ words.)

• CT-St. Leg.: There’s a total of nine special elections pending in the upcoming months in both houses of Connecticut’s legislature, all of which are seats that were previously held by Democrats (with eight of them heading off to join the Malloy administration and one of them heading to jail). To my eye (looking at the very helpful map provided by the Hartford Courant), these all look like they’re in Dem-friendly areas (with the possible exceptions of HD-36 and HD-101?), but Republicans are hopeful they can make some gains somewhere.

• PA-St. Sen.: The fields have been picked (by the party committees in Berks County) for the upcoming special election to replace Michael O’Pake in the light-blue SD-11. Dems, as expected, picked former Berks County Commissioner Judy Schwank, while the GOP picked Berks County Register of Wills Larry Medaglia. (Interestingly, PA-06 loser Manan Trivedi was one of the other names considered for the Dems.) The Mar. 25 election theoretically will be a big test of whether the state GOP has any more continued momentum in SE Pennsylvania suburbs after their gains in November, although there are rumors of polling showing the locally-well-known Schwank leading in the 20-point realm against all potential opponents.

• State parties: One of the big stories over the weekend was that assorted tea partiers won three of the four state GOP chair races that were being contested. Maybe the most attention-getting one, because of ’12 presidential implications, was the victory of Jack Kimball (who lost the ’10 gubernatorial primary to John Stephen) over the Sununu dynasty’s handpicked choice, Juliana Bergeron, in New Hampshire. However, the win of talk radio host Kirby Wilbur over incumbent Luke Esser in Washington also has substantial implications, inasmuch as former state Sen. Esser was a key ally of Rob McKenna (they both hail from suburban Bellevue and are among the last remnants of the state’s moderate establishment tradition), and this may presage increased willpower on the right to mount a strong primary challenge to McKenna in the ’12 gubernatorial race, despite the near-certainty that McKenna is the only Republican capable of winning the general election. Arizona also elected Tom Morrissey (against the wishes of both John McCain and Jon Kyl!). Oregon was the only state to buck the trend, electing Allen Alley (a moderate who lost the ’10 gubernatorial primary, although he actually got most of the tea party support in that primary against the also-moderate-but-vapid Chris Dudley, geriatric John Lim, and laughable Bill Sizemore, and still seemed to have some goodwill reserves among that set).

• Voter suppression: With Wisconsin and Minnesota’s Republican-held legislatures moving to maintain their power (by making it more difficult for Democrats to vote for Democrats, by imposing strict voter ID laws), the floodgates seem to be opening, indicating that the GOP’s main priority isn’t jobs but fighting the nonexistent rising tide of alleged voter fraud. Similar legislation is now emerging in legislatures in Texas, Kansas, and Iowa. It’s also becoming clearer that a voter ID law is just one step in the process in Wisconsin where the ultimate goal is elimination of Wisconsin’s fairly unique (and Dem-friendly) quirk of allowing same-day registration.

We don’t usually front-page mayoral race news, but this is going to wind up being the day’s biggest story, I’m sure (sorry, George Allen, your hopes of winning the day just got buried). Rahm Emanuel, way in the lead in terms of fundraising and polling, is out of the race, at least at this point:

An appellate panel ruled 2-1 that Emanuel did not meet the residency standard to run for mayor.

Appellate judges Thomas Hoffman and Shelvin Louise Marie Hall ruled against Emanuel. Justice Bertina Lampkin voted in favor of keeping President Obama’s former chief of staff on the Feb. 22 ballot.

This decision comes from the Illinois Appellate Court, which is the state’s intermediate-level court (and it’s a surprise, since Emanuel had no trouble winning his case in front of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners or at the trial level). It will, no doubt, promptly be appealed to the state Supreme Court, where it’s entirely possible it may be reversed and everything will be back to normal. So, while things are very scrambled for now (probably leaving Carol Mosely Braun the frontrunner, in a Rahm-free environment), we’ll have to wait and see.

Diarist roguemapper has a great post up featuring the creation of new majority-minority VRA districts in several southern states. I like these maps, but I don’t expect the Obama DOJ to be this aggressive in requiring new maj-min seats – and I also think that many southern legislators probably won’t be interested in drawing lines like these. As most Swingnuts are aware, heavily black districts have operated as Democratic vote sinks for two decades now, helping Republicans win seats abruptly depopulated of reliable blue votes. But with the southern realignment finally complete, I don’t think there are too many GOP officials in Alabama, for instance, who think they can’t easily hold 6 of 7 congressional districts.

In fact, this is exactly what the Republicans are planning on:

The likely result is a new congressional map that protects all six Republican congressmen and keeps intact the majority black district home to the only Democrat, according to U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Saks.

So the challenge to you is to create a map that packs as many African Americans into a single district in Alabama as you possibly can. No rules, and no prizes other than bragging rights (or maybe a job working for the Republicans on the redistricting committee). I figure there are three rough categories, though: compact (aka goo-goo fetishist-style), ugly but beautiful (aka abgin-style), and supremely ugly with touch-point contiguity (aka andgarden-style). Post as many entries (in as many styles) as you like.

Have fun, and share your results in comments!

P.S. If for some reason you’ve made it this far but haven’t yet encountered the glory that is Dave’s Redistricting App, well go and check it out! It’s the essential tool for any citizen redistricting efforts.

UPDATE: So far it looks like the most extreme gerrymander belongs to goohiost7, whose district is 81.5% African American.

Now that it’s 2011, the redistricting games will soon begin in earnest, with more detailed Census data expected in February or March and some states holding spring legislative sessions to deal with drawing new maps. Long ago I planned to do state-by-state rundowns of the redistricting process as soon as 2010 election results and Census reapportionment were clear. Now that time has arrived, and it’s time to look at Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa.

Previous diary on Alabama, Arizona, and Arkansas

Previous diary on California, Colorado, and Connecticut

Previous diary on Florida, Georgia, and Hawaii

The rest below the fold…

Idaho

Districts: 2

Who’s in charge? Nonpartisan commission

Is that important? Nope

Idaho competes with Hawaii for the prize of least interesting congressional redistricting process of the decade. The commission will move some precincts around to achieve population equality, and Reps. Labrador and Simpson will likely stay in office with huge majorities throughout the 2010s.

Illinois

Districts: 18, down from 19 in 2002

Who’s in charge? Democrats

Is that important? Extremely

This will be the first time in a long while that Democrats control redistricting in Illinois, and as their only obvious major gerrymandering opportunity of the decade, they will milk the state for every seat it’s worth. In such a blue state with an 11-8 Republican majority in its congressional delegation, big swings should not be difficult. They will likely eliminate a GOP seat in the Chicago area (my guess: force Bob Dold and Joe Walsh together in a more Republican North Shore district), though there’s been some discussion of eliminating a downstate district instead (say, Bobby Schilling’s or Aaron Schock’s). That is only the beginning. Lessening the minority percentages by just a little in the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 7th could ruin suburban Republicans like Adam Kinzinger and Peter Roskam, while liberal urban districts like the 9th and 5th could easily stretch westward to lessen GOP fortunes in nearby seats. In using Dave’s application, I found it possible to create an ethnically diverse, heavily Democratic 11th District for Kinzinger simply by lowering the African-American percentages for Rush and Jackson to the 52-53% range.

I think the Democrats will seek to gain perhaps three seats, for an 11-7 Democratic edge. Given the necessity of VRA protection in those four Chicago seats, any more would be pushing their luck. The most likely Republican casualties are Dold, Walsh, Kinzinger, Roskam, and Schilling, though at least one of them will likely be strengthened by the new gerrymander.

Indiana

Districts: 9

Who’s in charge? Republicans

Is that important? Yes

The bad news for Democrats is that Joe Donnelly is almost certainly toast — split up South Bend and Michigan City between two districts and he will be running in a much more GOP-friendly seat than the current Obama-supporting 2nd District. The silver lining is that Republicans can’t make things much worse for them otherwise. Democratic vote concentration in Lake County and Indianapolis will ensure solid vote sink districts for Pete Visclosky and Andre Carson, and Gov. Mitch Daniels has urged his party not to go crazy with boundary lines (this probably applies more to legislative districts, since only the 2nd will be significantly politically altered in this case).

Iowa

Districts: 4, down from 5 in 2002

Who’s in charge? Nonpartisan commission, with legislative approval

Is that important? Yes

Since the commission will not want to combine two Democrats (Braley and Loebsack) or two Republicans (King and Latham), it is almost sure that Tom Latham will face Leonard Boswell in a politically competitive Des Moines/Ames district. Latham has generally overperformed GOP baseline in his district while Boswell has had a number of tough races over the years and will be 78 next year. I could see the latter retiring if forced to run against Latham. But time will tell. Boswell’s tenacity — winning races since 1996 that, more often than not, have been relatively close — may ultimately pay off.

After only two years of a slim 32-30 Democratic majority in the New York State Senate, Republicans in this past election barely took back the chamber that they had previously held continuously for more than forty years. People around the country endlessly ask the question: how is it possible that Republicans have a majority of state senators in a state as “blue” as New York?

There is no simple answer to that question. Sufficed it to say, one of the most important factors is gerrymandering. Republicans did a masterful job of redistricting a very favorable map for themselves ten years ago. The current map is littered with Republican senators holding light blue Obama districts all over Long Island (9-0 Republican) and Upstate (21-4). With the great help of Daves Redistricting App 2.0, I set about in the task of redistricting New York's State Senate districts with three main goals in mind: 1.) connect Democratic towns and cities in Long Island, 2.) preserve majority-minority districts in New York City, and 3.) consolidate small cities Upstate. Much of the basis for my analysis comes from jeffmd's excellent post on the State Senate written in 2009 in which he looked at the numbers for the current districts. Inspecting the presidential toplines, it was determined that the cutoff between Republican and Democratic districts is about 58-60% Obama. My map uses that percentage as the benchmark. It would create 10 Democratic districts at over 58% in Upstate New York and another four at over 62% in Long Island. Combined with New York City, this would be more than enough to give Democrats a two-to-one majority in the State Senate. So without further ado, here is what I came up with:

 

	District	Pop. Center	Pop.	Wh%	Bl%	Asn%	Hisp%	Oth%		O%	M%
D	1	Hamptons	318633	66	11	3	17	2		62	38
R	2	Brookhaven	318569	89	2	2	6	1		49	51
R	3	Lindenhurst	318229	89	2	1	6	1		47	53
D	4	Huntington	318189	60	17	3	18	2		63	36
R	5	Smithtown	318668	91	1	3	4	1		46	54
R	6	Massapequa	318525	90	0	3	5	1		44	56
D	7	Great Neck	318243	67	12	8	11	2		64	35
D	8	Hempstead	318681	51	26	3	18	2		69	31
R	9	Garden City	318620	86	1	5	7	1		43	56
D	10	Jamaica	317030	9	55	9	15	12	Black Majority	92	8
D	11	Bayside	317619	60	5	18	13	3		62	37
D	12	Astoria	315924	42	5	13	34	5		78	21
D	13	East Elmhurst	318053	15	9	16	57	3	Hispanic Majority	81	18
D	14	St. Albans	318613	22	55	4	13	5	Black Majority	82	17
D	15	Forest Hills	316488	59	5	15	17	5		63	36
D	16	Flushing	317432	24	3	48	21	4	Asian Plurality	68	31
D	17	Bushwick	317715	13	13	7	60	6	Hispanic Majority	87	12
D	18	Bedford-Stuyvesant	317273	26	51	2	17	4	Black Majority	90	9
D	19	Canarsie	317538	28	52	3	14	3	Black Majority	83	17
D	20	Brooklyn Heights	318797	25	51	3	18	3	Black Majority	93	6
D	21	Prospect	318898	19	51	5	22	3	Black Majority	92	7
D	22	East Flatbush	317890	21	56	6	12	5	Black Majority	85	14
R	23	Homecrest	316816	81	1	11	6	2		33	67
D	24	Brighton Beach	317711	56	6	21	13	3		55	44
D	25	North Shore	318201	49	13	10	24	4		66	34
R	26	Arden Heights	323582	84	1	6	7	1		37	62
D	27	East Village	311559	45	6	27	19	3		84	15
D	28	Upper East Side	309905	83	3	8	5	2		75	24
D	29	Upper West Side	310495	73	5	8	11	2		85	14
D	30	Spanish Harlem	309111	22	23	3	50	2	Hispanic Majority	91	8
D	31	Bedford Park	308720	12	19	5	61	3	Hispanic Majority	90	9
D	32	Harlem	309836	2	61	1	33	2	Black Majority	97	2
D	33	Washington Heights	309056	22	12	4	60	2	Hispanic Majority	90	9
D	34	Soundview	309592	10	28	3	55	3	Hispanic Majority	90	10
D	35	Belmont	308704	21	21	3	53	2	Hispanic Majority	84	16
D	36	Mount Vernon	309493	14	60	2	20	4	Black Majority	92	8
D	37	Harrison	309361	73	7	5	13	2		61	38
D	38	Yonkers	309287	56	14	5	21	3		64	35
D	39	Ossining	309454	76	7	3	13	1		59	40
D	40	Clarkstown	317946	72	10	5	10	2		53	47
R	41	Carmel	321768	88	3	2	6	1		46	53
D	42	Poughkeepsie	317728	71	12	2	13	2		58	41
D	43	Kingston	320216	85	6	1	6	2		60	38
D	44	Troy	317388	86	6	3	3	2		58	40
D	45	Plattsburgh	317612	94	2	1	2	2		58	40
D	46	Albany	315314	84	9	2	3	1		63	35
R	47	Moreau	317511	96	1	1	1	1		49	49
R	48	Rome	317470	91	4	1	3	1		44	54
D	49	Syracuse	317634	80	12	2	3	3		62	36
R	50	Utica	317412	91	4	1	2	1		54	45
R	51	Herkimer	316544	96	1	0	2	1		45	53
R	52	Blooming Grove	319845	90	3	1	4	1		46	52
D	53	Ithaca	318178	87	4	3	3	2		61	38
R	54	Penn Yan	317011	95	2	0	2	2		47	51
R	55	Perinton	316789	92	3	3	2	1		51	47
D	56	Rochester	318289	60	26	3	9	2		72	27
R	57	Corning	317311	95	1	1	1	2		42	56
D	58	Amherst	317906	80	14	2	2	1		61	38
R	59	Hamburg	318084	94	1	1	2	2		49	49
D	60	Buffalo	317816	67	23	1	6	3		69	29
R	61	Batavia	318545	94	2	0	2	1		41	57
R	62	Greece	318537	93	3	1	2	1		46	52

Note, also, that I broke the state into four regions for simplicity: Upstate, Westchester/Bronx/Manhattan, Brooklyn/Queens/Staten Island, and Long Island. Here is another table that breaks down the numbers by region:

Region	County	Population	Districts	(+/-)	316280	(+/-)
Long Island	Suffolk	1516544
	Nassau	1349555
		2866099	9	0	318323	0.6
New York City	Queens	2320449
	Brooklyn	2588844
	Staten Island	496246
		5405539	17	1	317972	0.5
	Manhattan	1646675
	Bronx	1415056
	Westchester	961565
		4023296	13	1	309484	-2.1
Ustate New York	Rockland	301308
	Other	7010169
		7311477	23	-2	317890	0.5

As you can see from the table, I redraw the map so that NYC gained two seats at the expense of Upstate New York, while Long Island remained the same at 9 districts. The population of each district in each region is very equal with the greatest deviation of -2.1% below the ideal population in the region of Westchester/Bronx/Manhattan. The rest of the seats compensate for this by being about .5% above the ideal. Before discussing the statewide changes that would occur under this redistricting plan, first let me go through the four regions themselves…

Long Island

	District	Pop. Center	Pop.	Wh%	Bl%	Asn%	Hisp%	Oth%	O%	M%
D	1	Hamptons	318633	66	11	3	17	2	62	38
R	2	Brookhaven	318569	89	2	2	6	1	49	51	Ken LaValle-1, Port Jefferson
R	3	Lindenhurst	318229	89	2	1	6	1	47	53	Lee Zeldin-3, Shirley	Owen Johnson-4, West Babylon
D	4	Huntington	318189	60	17	3	18	2	63	36
R	5	Smithtown	318668	91	1	3	4	1	46	54	John Flanagan-2, East Northport	Carl Marcellino-5, Syosset
R	6	Massapequa	318525	90	0	3	5	1	44	56
D	7	Great Neck	318243	67	12	8	11	2	64	35
D	8	Hempstead	318681	51	26	3	18	2	69	31	Charles Fuschillo-8, Merrick	Dean Skelos-9, Rockville Centre
R	9	Garden City	318620	86	1	5	7	1	43	56	Kemp Hannon-6, Garden City	Jack Martins-7, Mineola

(The table above is a portion derived from the table in the intoduction. However, included in this table and the three that are to follow it, the number for each district has a link to a picture of that district's new boundaries. Also, I included the incumbent senators in whichever district that they would live in if my map went into affect. Each senator's party is denoted by the font color, and the data entries include the number district that each senator currently represents in the State Senate, as well as where they live and a link to their official biographies.)

Long Island has been the province of Republicans in the New York State Senate for many decades. At the height of the Democratic wave in 2008, Long Island elected only two Democratic senators out of nine total. Both of them lost their seats in this last election, returning Long Island to its usual position of having only Republicans represent them in the State Senate. It's not as though Long Island is that conservative overall — indeed, all but one of the current nine senate districts in Nassau and Suffolk Counties was won by Obama. Republicans have been very effective in diluting Democratic votes, thereby allowing many independents who fear a complete Democratically-controlled Albany to elect Republican candidates for the State Senate.

Of the eight Obama-voting Long Island Senate districts, none of them were won by more than about 55%, which is a very managable percentage for incumbent GOP senators, including the new Majority Leader Dean Skelos, who hails from Rockville Centre in Nassau County. In this region, the goal was to be realistic about what could be achieved and very cautious in achieving it. I drew up four Democratic districts each at over 62% for Obama.

Three out of the four new Democratic districts that I created are left open for any Dem who wants them. The most Democratic district in the region — SD-8, based in Hempstead and Long Beach — is occupied by Skelos and Senator Charles Fuschillo. As the Black and Hispanic populations are spread throughout Long Island, each district retains their white majority.

 

Queens, Brooklyn, and Staten Island

	District	Pop. Center	Pop.	Wh%	Bl%	Asn%	Hisp%	Oth%		O%	M%
D	10	Jamaica	317030	9	55	9	15	12	Black Majority	92	8	Shirley Huntley-10, Jamaica
D	11	Bayside	317619	60	5	18	13	3		62	37	Tony Avella-11, Whitestone
D	12	Astoria	315924	42	5	13	34	5		78	21	Michael Gianaris-12, Astoria
D	13	East Elmhurst	318053	15	9	16	57	3	Hispanic Majority	81	18	Jose Peralta-13, East Elmhurst
D	14	St. Albans	318613	22	55	4	13	5	Black Majority	82	17	Malcolm Smith-14, St. Albans
D	15	Forest Hills	316488	59	5	15	17	5		63	36
D	16	Flushing	317432	24	3	48	21	4	Asian Plurality	68	31	Toby Ann Stavisky-16, Flushing
D	17	Bushwick	317715	13	13	7	60	6	Hispanic Majority	87	12	Joseph Addabbo-15, Ozone Park	Martin Malave Dilan-17, Bushwick
D	18	Bedford-Stuyvesant	317273	26	51	2	17	4	Black Majority	90	9
D	19	Canarsie	317538	28	52	3	14	3	Black Majority	83	17	John Sampson-19, Canarsie
D	20	Brooklyn Heights	318797	25	51	3	18	3	Black Majority	93	6	Valmanette Montgomery-18, Boerum Hills	Eric Adams-20, Crown Heights	Daniel Squadron-25, Brooklyn Heights
D	21	Prospect	318898	19	51	5	22	3	Black Majority	92	7	Kevin Parker-21, Flatbush
D	22	East Flatbush	317890	21	56	6	12	5	Black Majority	85	14
R	23	Homecrest	316816	81	1	11	6	2		33	67	Martin Golden-22, Bay Ridge
D	24	Brighton Beach	317711	56	6	21	13	3		55	44	Carl Kruger-27, Sheepshead Bay
D	25	North Shore	318201	49	13	10	24	4		66	34	Diane Savino-23, Staten Island
R	26	Arden Heights	323582	84	1	6	7	1		37	62	Andrew Lanza-24, Great Kills

While much of Staten Island remains a stubborn Republican bulwark, Queens and Brooklyn voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama in 2008. They are home to most of New York City's black population, as well as significant Hispanic and Asian communities. Since this area of the state is so heavily Democratic, the overriding goal for this region was not to squeeze out more Democratic seats, but to strengthen a few shaky ones and create new Voting Rights Act (VRA) districts wherever possible. Under my plan, this region would gain one additional seat as a result of new population estimates given by the Census Bureau. 

This map preserves the two African-American majority districts in Queens and adds a fifth black majority district to the four that already exist in Brooklyn. One of the best things about this map is that it creates an Asian plurality district that is based in Flushing and spread throughout many parts of Queens. The 16th district is currently represented by Sen. Toby Ann Stavisky, but if the Asian community were able to unite around a consensus candidate, she could well be displaced in a primary. I found it impossible to make the 16th District any more heavily Asian than 48%, but the next largest racial community was 24% of the population, so if Stavisky were to retire, this would most likely go to an Asian candidate. It also preserves the two Hispanic majority districts in Queens and Brooklyn.

The recently-flipped 11th and 15th Districts would be strengthened for the Democrats. Carl Kruger's 27th district in southern Brooklyn would be radically changed into the 24th district, both strengthening our vote there and also allowing for a primary challenge to the less-than-venerable “Amigo.” At 55% for Obama, the 24th is one of two districts that I created below the magic 58% line that I still counted in the Democratic column — largely because presidential voting patterns in southern Brooklyn are volatile and not necessarily indicative of a broader ideological differentiation. What Republican-leaning communities that do exist here would be consolidated into two large McCain majority districts: the 23rd in southern Brooklyn and the 26th in southern Staten Island, both of which are currently represented by Republican Senators anyway.

 

Manhattan, Bronx, and Westchester County

	District	Pop. Center	Pop.	Wh%	Bl%	Asn%	Hisp%	Oth%		O%	M%
D	27	East Village	311559	45	6	27	19	3		84	15
D	28	Upper East Side	309905	83	3	8	5	2		75	24	Liz Krueger-26, Upper East Side
D	29	Upper West Side	310495	73	5	8	11	2		85	14	Thomas Duane-29, Upper West Side
D	30	Spanish Harlem	309111	22	23	3	50	2	Hispanic Majority	91	8	Jose Serrano-28, Spanish Harlem
D	31	Bedford Park	308720	12	19	5	61	3	Hispanic Majority	90	9	Gustavo Rivera-33, Kingsbridge Heights
D	32	Harlem	309836	2	61	1	33	2	Black Majority	97	2	Bill Perkins-30, Harlem
D	33	Washington Heights	309056	22	12	4	60	2	Hispanic Majority	90	9	Adriano Espaillat-31, Washington Heights
D	34	Soundview	309592	10	28	3	55	3	Hispanic Majority	90	10	Ruben Diaz-32, Soundview	Jeffrey Klein-34, Throgs Neck
D	35	Belmont	308704	21	21	3	53	2	Hispanic Majority	84	16
D	36	Mount Vernon	309493	14	60	2	20	4	Black Majority	92	8	Ruth Hassel-Thompson-36, Williamsbridge
D	37	Scarsdale	309361	73	7	5	13	2		61	38	Suzi Oppenheimer-37, Mamaroneck
D	38	Yonkers	309287	56	14	5	21	3		64	35	Andrea Stewart-Cousins-35, Yonkers
D	39	Ossining	309454	76	7	3	13	1		59	40

This region, encompassing Manhattan, Bronx, and Westchester County, is the most strongly Democratic area in one of the most Democratic-leaning states in the Union. It is home to the largest Hispanic communities in the Northeast United States — mostly Peurto Rican, but also Dominican, Mexican, and other Latin American heritages. The white communities here also tend to be much more liberal than their counterparts in Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island. That is especially the case in Manhattan and Westchester, which are home to many educated urban white professionals.

All twelve districts here are represented by Democrats in the State Senate. That would stay the same under my plan, except for the addition of a thirteenth Democratic district. This is the second distric that comes at the expense of Upstate New York — the other one being in Brooklyn.

Both majority African-American districts would remain intact. The map also adds another Hispanic-majority district to the four that currently exist.

Upstate New York

	District	Pop. Center	Pop.	Wh%	Bl%	Asn%	Hisp%	Oth%	O%	M%
D	40	Clarkstown	317946	72	10	5	10	2	53	47	David Carlucci-38, Clarkstown
R	41	Carmel	321768	88	3	2	6	1	46	53	Greg Ball-40, Patterson
D	42	Poughkeepsie	317728	71	12	2	13	2	58	41	Bill Larkin-39, New Windsor	Stephen Saland-41, Poughkeepsie
D	43	Kingston	320216	85	6	1	6	2	60	38
D	44	Troy	317388	86	6	3	3	2	58	40	Hugh Farley-44, Schenectady
D	45	Plattsburgh	317612	94	2	1	2	2	58	40	Betty Little-45, Queensbury	Patty Ritchie-48, Heuvelton
D	46	Albany	315314	84	9	2	3	1	63	35	Neil Breslin-46, Albany	James Seward-51, Milford
R	47	Moreau	317511	96	1	1	1	1	49	49	Roy McDonald-43, Stillwater
R	48	Rome	317470	91	4	1	3	1	44	54	Joseph Griffo-47, Rome
D	49	Syracuse	317634	80	12	2	3	3	62	36	David Valesky-49, Oneida	John DeFrancisco-50, Syracuse
R	50	Utica	317412	91	4	1	2	1	54	45
R	51	Herkimer	316544	96	1	0	2	1	45	53
R	52	Blooming Grove	319845	90	3	1	4	1	46	52	John Bonacic-42, Mount Hope
D	53	Ithaca	318178	87	4	3	3	2	61	38	Thomas Libous-52, Binghamton	Michael Nozzollio-54, Fayette
R	54	Sodus	317011	95	2	0	2	2	47	51
R	55	Perinton	316789	92	3	3	2	1	51	47	James Alesi-55, East Rochester
D	56	Rochester	318289	60	26	3	9	2	72	27
R	57	Corning	317311	95	1	1	1	2	42	56	Thomas O'Mara-53, Big Flats	Catharine Young-57, Olean
D	58	Amherst	317906	80	14	2	2	1	61	38	Tim Kennedy-58, Buffalo
R	59	Hamburg	318084	94	1	1	2	2	49	49	Pat Gallivan-59, Elma	Mike Ranzenhofer-61, Clarence
D	60	Buffalo	317816	67	23	1	6	3	69	29	Mark Grisanti-60, Buffalo
R	61	Batavia	318545	94	2	0	2	1	41	57
R	62	Greece	318537	93	3	1	2	1	46	52	Joe Robach-56, Greece	George Maziarz-62, Newfane

Here more than anywhere else in the state, Republicans dominate in local and state politics. Recently, Democrats lost five of their ten Upstate congressional districts. This is also where Republicans picked up two Senate seats and gained about a half-dozen Assembly seats last fall. Nevertheless, there are still many strongly Democratic areas of Upstate New York: mostly medium- and small-sized cities and liberal inner-suburbs that dot the landscape from the Hudson Valley to the Great Lakes. The goal was to consolidate those areas and churn out as many new Democratic districts as possible. Here again, as in Long Island, the minority ethnic populations are too spread out to create any VRA districts. Instead, this is where the great bulk of Republican Senate seats would hit the buzz-saw.

The region as a whole would lose two seats, mostly from the equalization of populations in each Senate district — which Republicans largely disregarded during the last redistricting ten years ago — as well as the much greater population growth downstate.

I was able to get about half of these 23 districts in the Democratic column. The 40th District, based in Rockland County, is the second of only two districts in this entire map (the other being in southern Brooklyn) that I counted as a Democratic district even though Obama's vote there was less than 58%. The reason is that this seat was one of very few elected offices around the country that Democrats actually gained from the Republicans in this last election. The seat would also bolster its Democratic vote through redistricting, so I figured, if David Carlucci could pick it up for the Dems in a year like 2010, odds are pretty good that he'll be able to hold it in a lot of other political environments.

I was able to get ten of these districts at over 58% for Obama. One of the most certain Democratic gains under this plan would be my native 56th Senate District, based in the City of Rochester and the Town of Brighton. Republican Senator Joe Robach has vexingly been able to hold onto this district for years despite the fact that it voted by a two-to-one margin for Barack Obama in 2008 (66%-33%). Under this plan, Robach's hometown of Greece would be removed from the 56th and replaced by the Democratic-leaning suburbs of Gates and Irondequoit.

The four seats that we do hold here would be strengthened. The 60th District, which is even more Democratic district than the 56th, voted out a Democratic incumbent last fall. This district would remain largely unchanged in the hope that a different Dem might likely be able to win it back from freshman Republican Senator Mark Grisanti.

As is convention when State Senate seats are redistricted in Upstate New York, I left every town intact. In addition, only two cities are divided between different districts: Buffalo and Tonawanda (just south of Niagra Falls). The self-imposed requirement that towns be left undivided was a major constraint, but it would probably help a plan like this to survive a court challenge.

 

Summary:

A major drawback of this map is that without realizing it, I redraw the lines with no attention paid to which district each senator lives in. Hence, a lot of Democratic primaries and games of musical chairs would happen in this plan that might otherwise have been avoided. But, by the time I realized it, it was too late. In any event, many more Republicans get stuck together than Democrats, so that serves to counter-balance this problem.

This map pays tribute to the Voting Rights Act by creating three new majority-minority district: a new Black-majority district in Brooklyn, an Asian-plurality district in Queens, and a fifth Hispanic-majority district in the Bronx.

My plan also evens out the population disparities between regions by making every seat within only a few thousands residents off from the ideal population of 316,280 people per district. In applying a fairer division among the state's population and using new population estimates given by the Census, Upstate New York lost two districts to New York City.

I am confident that if this plan went into affect at the next election, Democrats would hold a large 43-19 majority in the New York State Senate for many years to come. But alas, Republicans won back this chamber last year and thus, it is not to be. However, I'm still convinced that with new population estimates, it will be extremely difficult for Republicans to redistrict another map that would allow them to retain the majority. Their luck has simply run out. They may be able to preserve many incumbents in Upstate and Long Island, but remember that Democrats only need to gain one seat for them to retake the majority (a 31-31 tie would allow Democratic Lt. Gov. Bob Duffy to act as the tie-breaker). And as I've shown through this analysis, downstate will have to gain two seats for the next redistricting plan to be in compliance with the Census.

It took many practice tries, but I believe this map provides the strongest possible plan for a large Democratic majority in the Senate that not only respects existing VRA districts, but also creates three new ones. In short, this is the ideal Democratic redistricting plan for the New York State Senate.

I was almost done drawing this map last year when I realized that the passage of Prop 20 is a likely outcome.  A Democratic gerrymander of California then became moot of course and so I never finished.  However, I recently thought it would be neat to post anyhow, as many of the maps posted here are only theoretical and don’t have a chance of becoming reality (or anything close to reality).  So I finished my map – but perhaps not taking as much care as when I first started.  Hence, I should note that the area around Los Angeles and Kern Counties was drawn “after the fact” and is therefore not as “thought out” as other parts of the map.  

Nevertheless, I still tried to be true to my original goals: creating as many solid Democratic seats as possible, increasing the number of Hispanic and other minority-majority districts, and making sure that all Democratic incumbents kept as much of their current territory as possible.  The resulting map has only 7 Republican seats.  The other 46 districts are all at least 61% Obama districts — except for CA-3 and CA-4, which are 58% Obama (so really, 7 GOP, 2 districts 58% Obama, and 44 districts at 61% or more Obama) … I figured CA-3 and CA-4 could be left at the lower level as those two districts were almost won by Democrats back in 2008 even as their current configurations are a lot more Republican, and also because the percentage change between 2004 and 2008 was not as great in this part of California as it was in the rest of the state.  Hence, under my estimates, John Kerry would still have been the winner in my new versions of CA-3 and CA-4, as he would have been the winner in all the 61%+ Obama districts created.

I figured I would post this map despite the fact that a commission will now be drawing the districts.  I believe that it’s still instructive in some respects.  For example, it’s interesting to me that despite “packing” Republicans into just 7 districts, McCain got 60%+ of the vote in only 1 of those — meaning that the GOP brand is quickly thinning out in the state, and in the near- and mid-term future, even a non-partisan plan of the state is likely to result in a relatively small number of Republican representatives.  Another good example of how thinly-spread the GOP is becoming may be found by looking at San Diego Co. — historically one of the more Republican parts of the state.  In this map, I was able to draw three relatively compact 61 Obama/37 McCain districts (CA-50, 51, 53) wholly confined to the area around the city of San Diego/coastal part of the county, while drawing two other 61/62% Obama districts, both over 60% hispanic, that take in other significant chunks of the county (CA-47, 49).  The only GOP district left in San Diego Co. would be CA-52.

Another interesting thing was that the more minority-majority districts I created, the more Democratic districts I wound up with overall.  This may seem counter-intuitive at first, and certainly doesn’t fit the pattern in most other parts of the country, where the creation of more minority-majority seats means less Democratic seats overall.  Apparently, in California the minority population is pretty thoroughly or effectively spread out these days (no longer just concentrated in urban enclaves) that wherever you draw a district, there’s a good chance it will be a minority-majority district — even if a single ethnic/racial group does not form a majority.  In fact, in this map 30 out of 53 districts are minority-majority.  It appears that much of the hispanic population in the state is geographically interspersed among the GOP population.  Hence, even (and especially ?) when non-partisan districts are drawn much of the two populations will “mix” resulting in, overall, more Democratic districts as the highly-Democratic hispanic population will make the new compact districts lean more towards that side of the political spectrum (this is especially true over the long-term, and especially true if the GOP continiues to alienate hispanics with their policies).

Basically, the map makes the districts of many white Democratic incumbents (like Berman and Filner) more white, while many GOP seats are turned into new hispanic-majority seats.  Each Democratic incumbent save two also gets to keep at least 30% of his or her current constituents (in most cases, the percentage is significantly higher; the only exceptions are Chu — where I only keep her hometown area, but the new asian-plurality district is nevertheless drawn to her advantage; and, Napolitano, who gets to keep a bit under 30% of her constituents — but her new district is still centered around her hometown and is over 60% hispanic.  I should note that the district I “assign” to Linda Sanchez here is CA-39, and she currently represents slightly under 30% of the new district; however, Sanchez could just as well decide to run in what’s labeled as CA-40 on this map, where she would get to keep 50% of her current constituents, and her district would border her sister’s — this is all theoretical, of course, as this map will never happen !     …. I should also note that some districts here “look” as if they were completely “shifted” in terms of geography — Loretta Sanchez’s district is a good example — as the boundaries expand all the way into Oceanside in San Diego Co., and yet population-wise, the Congresswoman still gets to keep over 60% of her current constituents, as much of the population is concentrated in Santa Ana and Anaheim.)

The only districts which are 75% or more Obama are CA-8, CA-31 and CA-33.  The population deviation is  +/- under 1,000 persons.

Anyhow, here’s the map, and then a brief run-down of the districts:

The following districts are drawn to elect a Democrat:

CA-1 Thompson – 63 Obama, 35 McCain – above 70% white

CA-3 Lungren – 58 O, 40 M – above 60% white

CA-4 McClintock – 58 O, 40 M – above 60% white

CA-5 Matsui – 61 O, 37 M – above 50% white

CA-6 Woolsey – 70 O, 28 M – above 70% white

CA-7 Miller – 63 O, 35 M – above 50% white

CA-8 Pelosi – 85 O, 13 M – white plurality, above 30% asian

CA-9 Lee – 74 O, 25 M – white plurality, around 20% black

CA-10 Garamendi – 66 O, 33 M – above 50% white

CA-11 McNerney – 65 O, 34 M – above 50% white

CA-12 Speier – 74 O, 24 M – white plurality

CA-13 Stark – 73 O, 25 M – white plurality, above 30% asian

CA-14 Eshoo – 66 O, 33 M – above 50% white

CA-15 Honda – 68 O, 30 M – white and asian each around 40%

CA-16 Lofgren – 68 O, 31 M – white plurality

CA-17 Farr – 63 O, 35 M – above 60% white

CA-18 Cardoza – 61 O, 37 M – above 50% hispanic

CA-19 Denham – 61 O, 38 M – above 50% hispanic

CA-20 Costa – 61 O, 38 M – above 50% hispanic

CA-22 McCarthy – 61 O, 38 M – around 70% hispanic

CA-23 Capps – 61 O, 37 M – above 60% white

CA-24 Gallegly – 62 O, 37 M – around 70% white

CA-25 McKeon – 61 O, 37 M – above 50% hispanic

CA-26 Dreier – 61 O, 37 M – above 50% hispanic

CA-27 Sherman – 63 O, 35 M – above 50% white

CA-28 Berman – 63 O, 35 M – hispanic plurality (but less than current district)

CA-29 Schiff – 63 O, 35 M – white and hispanic each around 40%

CA-30 Waxman – 63 O, 35 M – above 50% white

CA-31 Becerra – 78 O, 20 M – above 65% hispanic

CA-32 Chu – 62 O, 36 M – asian plurality

CA-33 Bass – 75 O, 23 M – no dominant group, large numbers of whites, hispanics, blacks and asians

CA-34 Roybal-Allard – 73 O, 25 M – above 60% hispanic

CA-35 Waters – 72 O, 27 M – almost equal number of whites, blacks and hispanics

CA-36 Harman – 65 O, 33 M – white and hispanic each around 40%

CA-37 Richardson – 63 O, 36 M – significant numbers of hispanics, whites and blacks, with no group above 40% of population

CA-38 Napolitano – 62 O, 36 M – above 60% hispanic

CA-39 Sanchez – 66 O, 31 M – above 60% hispanic

CA-40 Royce – 62 O, 36 M – above 60% hispanic

CA-43 Baca – 64 O, 34 M – above 50% hispanic

CA-44 Calvert – 63 O, 35 M – hispanic plurality

CA-46 Rochrabacher – 61 O, 37 M – white plurality

CA-47 Sanchez – 61 O, 37 M – above 65% hispanic (asian pop. under 10%)

CA-49 Issa – 62 O, 36 M – above 60% hispanic

CA-50 Bilbray – 61 O, 37 M – above 50% white

CA-51 Filner – 61 O, 37 M – hispanic plurality (but less than current district)

CA-53 Davis – 61 O, 37 M – above 50% white

The following are the GOP seats:

CA-2 Herger – 40 Obama – 58 McCain – around 80% white

CA-21 Nunes – 36 O, 62 M – above 60% white

CA-41 Lewis – 38 O, 58 M – around 70% white

CA-42 Miller – 42 O, 56 M – around 60% white

CA-45 Bono Mack – 41 O, 57 M – around 70% white

CA-48 Campbell – 43 O, 55 M – around 70% white

CA-52 Hunter – 39 O, 59 M – above 70% white