Tag: Wisconsin

It’s clear now that there are massive protests in Wisconsin over the governor’s plan to remove collective bargaining rights from some public employees. But how do the majority of people in Wisconsin feel about the governor’s plan? Lets look at some polling on the issue.

We Ask America had a poll on the situation Thursday. They ask:

As you may know, Gov. Scott Walker has proposed a plan to limit the pay of government workers and teachers, increase their share of the cost of benefits, and strip some public-employ unions of much of their power. We’d like to know if APPROVE or DISAPPROVE of Gov. Walker’s plan.

43.05% Approve

51.90% Disapprove

(2400 Wisconsin residents)

First of all, remember that WAA is a Republican group. Note that there is no mention in that wording of collective bargaining rights. Yet they still find a majority opposed.

WAA also asked this question:

It was reported today that Democratic state senators have left the capitol in order to prevent a vote of Gov. Walker’s measures. Do you think that the Democratic state senators should return to the state capitol to vote on the issue?

Yes (should return): 55.99%

No (shouldn’t return): 36.38%

This is not surprising to me, personally. I believe that the calculation made by the state senators is that by leaving the state they make this a bigger news item, which could give them more benefit than leaving the state hurts them. I highly doubt the decision by Democratic lawmakers to leave the state significantly impacted anyone’s opinion of the bill itself.

A poll by The Shop Consulting group for Building a Stronger Wisconsin was also conducted on Thursday. The poll asked the following:

Rather than negotiate with public employee Unions to address budget

issues in Wisconsin, Governor Walker (WALK-ER) has proposed a number of changes that would directly affect many public employees in Wisconsin. With the exception of police and firefighters, all  state, county and municipal employees including teachers will be asked to contribute greater amounts to help pay for health care and retirement benefits which would be in effect a pay reduction of around 9%.

How would you characterize your feelings about this portion of the proposal?

Would you say:

I fully support Walker’s proposal: 33.7%

I think that public employees should pay more of the costs of their health care and  retirement, but I think this proposal goes too far: 26.6%

I oppose Walker’s proposal and believe it is an  attack on Unions and Wisconsin workers: 35.2%

The Walker proposal includes not only significant increases in public employee contributions for health care and retirement, but strips them of the ability to collectively bargain on any issue other than wages. Collective bargaining between workers and management is used to address many issues from workplace discipline to working hours and conditions.

What do you feel about Walker’s proposal after learning this?  

Would you say:

I fully support Walker’s proposal: 31.9%

I support some additional contributions by employees for health care and retirement, but removing the ability to collectively bargain is going too far: 32.1%

I oppose Walker’s proposal and believe it is an attack on Unions and Wisconsin workers: 32.9%

(602 Wisconsin “voters”-I assume they mean registered voters, not likely voters or residents, but I could be wrong)

I would definitely take this poll with a grain of salt-Building a Stronger Wisconsin is a progressive group and some of the question wording seems biased to me. However, I think it makes an important distinction: namely, whether people support lowering benefits for public employees and whether they support stripping them of benefits. It seems to me a large portion of people could support reducing public employee pay/benefits to balance the budget, but still think they should have the ability to collectively bargain.

Now let’s look at Gov Walker’s own ratings. The most recent poll was taken by PPP on Dec 10-12. It showed Walker slightly underwater, with 41% having a favorable opinion of him compared to 49% unfavorable. This is significantly less than the polls taken right before the election, which showed Walker with a consistently favorable image among likely voters:

The reason PPP gives for this is a simple one: their December poll was of registered voters, the earlier polls were of likely voters. Democrats traditionally do better in polls of registered voters compared to polls of likely voters, and this was especially true in 2010. This is a possible explanation, but it seems a little strange to me that the shift from likely to registered voters alone would cause such a large shift in opinions, from a +14 spread in favorable ratings to a -8 one. In the 2010 elections, Democrats did about six points better in registered voter polls versus likely voter polls, although some firms showed larger gaps. This is significantly less than the gap between the pre election likely voter polls of Walker’s favorable ratings and the post election PPP poll. This suggests that either PPP’s Dec poll was an outlier, which is definitely possible, or that Walker’s favorable ratings fell in the space between the election and when PPP took the poll. There was significant news coverage in this time period of then gov elect Walker’s promise to cancel a high speed rail connection between Madison and Milwaukee. This could have slightly hurt Walker, however given that he declared his attentions to do this many times on the campaign trail that seems somewhat unlikely to me, and regardless I doubt that issue alone would have caused such a profound drop in Walker’s ratings. And all of this polling was before the controversy over this new legislation, which undoubtedly has had a large impact on Walker’s ratings, either positive or negative. This old poll is of little use to us now, and it seems a new poll on Walker’s approval rating is badly needed.

With the only polls directly dealing with this situation being one from a Republican firm, one sponsored by a progressive organization, and one that is terribly outdated, it seems there is little relevant polling on this situation. So it might be worth it to look at polling on the question of public sector unions in general.

A very comprehensive poll covering many union-related topics was taken by Pew on Thursday.

With the Wisconsin Senate’s Democratic caucus in the news recently, I thought I would look at its composition and, since the chamber flipped in 2010, what the “lost” seats looked like geographically/demographically.

Wisconsin has 8 Congressional districts and 33 Senate districts, each of which contains 3 Assembly districts.  That works out to about 4 Senate districts per Congressional districts, and that’s how I’m going to loosely divide them up, although it will be rougher in places than others.

The Congressional districts: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lts…

and the Senate districts:

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lts…

Gwen Moore’s Milwaukee Congressional district corresponds to state Senate districts 3, 4, 6, and 7.  All are Democratic-held, although Ballotpedia points out that District 7’s Chris Larson was one of a small handful of candidates to beat an incumbent state Senator in a primary.  (District 7 snakes around covering coastal Milwaukee).  A number of Assembly districts in these Senate districts are actually Republican-held, and some seem to be suburban, but I’m going to look at that in another diary.

Jim Sensenbrenner’s affluent suburban Milwaukee district can correspond to state Senate districts 5, 8, 33, and 20 (as well as some of 13).  All are Republican-held, and District 5 flipped in 2010.  From its appearance I guessed that it was a classic ritzy inner-ring suburban district, and so it appears to be (although one of its assembly districts is actually in Milwaukee proper).  Check out the median income map: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lrb…

Paul Ryan’s district in the southeast corner of the state can correspond to districts 11, 21, 22, and 28 (as well as some of 15).  All are Republican-held except for District 22, more or less coterminous with Kenosha County.  According to Wiki, it’s actually considered part of the Chicago metro area.  District 21, right above it, flipped in 2010.  It also appears affluent, although less so than District 22.

Tammy Baldwin’s Madison-area district can correspond to districts 15, 16, 26, and 27 (as well as some of 13 and 14).  All are Democratic-held.  Interesting note: District 26, covering Madison proper, is represented by Fred Risser.  As per Ballotpedia, he is the longest-serving state legislator in the United States, having first been elected in 1963.

The northern, Green Bay-ish district formerly represented by Steve Kagen and now by Reid Riggle can correspond loosely to districts 1, 2, 30, and 12 (it also has some of 14, at least).  30 and 12 are Democratic (30 seems to correspond to the city of Green Bay, while 12 is very large and rural) while 1 and 2 are Republican–perhaps why it is such a swingy district.  

Tom Petri’s district stretches, presumably, between the Milwaukee and Madison suburbs.  It is the hardest to fit into Senate districts, covering parts of 9, 13, 14, 18, 19, and 20.  Anyway, all are Republican, and none flipped in 2010.

Ron Kind represents a district with a reputation for a rare combination of ruralness and Democratic-friendlishness.  I’m going to call it more or less Districts 17, 23, 31, and 32, it also has part of 10.  Districts 31 is held by a Democrat, and Districts 10, 17, 23, and 32 by Republicans.  Doesn’t make Kind’s district look like very friendly territory, but then District 23 just flipped in 2010.  It contains some of Eau Claire, but I can’t tell too much interesting about it.  I would be interested to know what explains the state/fed difference here.

Finally, Dave Obey’s old district, now represented by Sean Duffy, covers Districts 24, 25, and 29, as well as the rest of District 10 and some of Districts 23 and 12.  This Congressional district, of course, flipped in 2010, and so did one of its parts, Senate District 29 (and 23).  District 29 contains some wealthy areas, amusingly, they seem to correspond to the village of Rothschild(!).  Districts 24 and 25 remain in the D fold; District 24 is represented by unsuccessful 2010 Congressional nominee Julie Lassa.

In short, the Wisconsin Senate Dem caucus seems to unsurprisingly mirror its Congressional delegation.  Of its 14 seats, 8 more or less line up with the Milwaukee and Madison areas represented by Moore and Baldwin.  Of the remaining 6, one is in Chicagoland, one covers Green Bay, one includes much of Eau Claire, and the remaining three include two large, Canada-bordering rural districts and Lassa’s 24th.  Of note, only odd-numbered seats were up in 2010, so it is possible that 12 and 24, two of these last three, got spared by chance  while the adjacent 23 and 29 flipped.

Anyway, I am always wondering where state-level Dems are, so I thought I would summarize it up for y’all.  I welcome corrections and comments from more Wi-knowledgeable readers.

Looking at WI voting patterns, it seems that there pretty much have to be three Democratic districts in the state: one in Milwaukee, one in Madison, and one along the western border with Minnesota. But if the GOP wanted to be really nasty, they could pack Madison in with the heavily Democratic regions along the Western border into one super-democratic district and allowing them to take over all the other districts in the state. This map accomplishes a pretty solid 6-2 split in the WI delegation for the GOP, while simultaneously strengthening the districts of reps Ryan, Duffy, and Ribble.  

The Democratic vote dump in the 2nd connects Madison, La Crosse, the counties just south of Duluth, and some other highly Democratic counties in the SW region, forcing reps Kind and Baldwin into one district. I would have added in Ashland Co, but rep Duffy lives there (reps Duffy and Ryan are both in the unfortunate situation of living in the most democratic areas of their districts, interestingly). Rep Ryan’s 1st is probably shifted the most to the right of any district in this map, due to his seniority in the house. It loses the Dem-leaning areas of Racine and Kenosha, and gains a lot of more rural territory. Some of this territory in the SW corner of the state is ancestrally Democratic (although it voted mainly GOP this year), but the rest of the area is very conservative, which has the effect of giving Ryan a pretty safe seat for as long as he wants it. Ryan seemed to have a lock on his old seat, but if the GOP is smart they’ll probably try to make it safer; his old district was won by Obama in 08 (although some of that may have been due to the fact that WI-01 borders Illinois and contains areas like Racine and Kenosha that are suburbs of Chicago). Perhaps more importantly, Ryan is actually incredibly conservative for a swing district like his, this analysis by Crisitunity back in 2009 found him to be the house GOPer in the 110th congress most to the right of his district (the GOP version of Nate Silver’s Most Valuable Democrat, if you will). This seems to suggest that in the future Ryan could be vulnerable in his current district, although he hasn’t shown any signs of it yet. Anyway, under this map, he probably wouldn’t be vulnerable anymore. Racine and Kenosha are moved to the 5th and 6th, respectively. Those districts have moved slightly to the left to help other districts, but they are still solidly GOP districts anchored in very conservative territory. The 4th in Milwaukee has gotten slightly more Democratic, and is now majority-minority (47% W, 33% B, 15% H), which helps the surrounding districts a little. The 8th is changed a little in partisanship; it has lost some light red areas in the NE corner of the state for deep red areas around Manitowoc and Sheboygan. The 3rd now stretches east from Eau Claire to Oshkosh. It is probably the most Democratic of all the districts other than the 2nd and 4th. And finally the 7th has now lost the most Democratic parts of the district is now much safer for rep Duffy.

The upper midwest has generally had very little history for gerrymandering in the past, so there could be a good deal of political fallout for the GOP if they decide to push a plan like this. They might be able to get away with chunking the south of Duluth counties into the 3rd, but something like this, although not terrible by the standards of states like CA, MD, or TX, would be the worst gerrymander WI has seen in ages.

With all the redistricting fun, I feel as if I should take a stab at my home state, Wisconsin.  Unfortunately for Democrats, this past cycle was an absolute bloodbath.  We lost basically everything that was competitive, with the exception of Ron Kind’s seat and some State Senate and Assembly seats, even the State Senate Majority leader and Speaker of the State Assembly were defeated.   Thus this leaves Republicans with complete discretion with redistricting.  While there is plenty to do with the state legislative seats (of which I also created a map of State Senate seats that can potentially lock Democrats out for years), there simply is not that much that can be done with congressional seats.  While Republicans might take this year’s results as a sign that Wisconsin will have a permanent conservative majority, it is instructive to look at the 2008 map and see how it is basically the complete opposite.  As a result, with the exception of the Milwaukee area, the Madison area, and a few other areas, most of the state is basically swing areas, as the 2008 and 2010 maps indicate.

Thus, the problem for the Wisconsin GOP is that Wisconsin will support at least 3 Democratic seats.  Milwaukee and Madison are simply too large and too Democratic to get rid of Moore and Baldwin. Besides I cannot imagine a Republican wanting to take on inner-city Milwaukee or lefty Madison.    As for Ron Kind, if he can stand a year like this, he has his seat for life.  Additionally, Wisconsin is peculiar in that it has a number of rural Democratic voters in the West and Southwest parts of the state, so it would be difficult to get rid of a third Democratic seat.  

With this in mind, I decided that the best and safest path would be not necessarily an incumbent protection map, but protecting Ryan and Duffy.   With Ryan being Budget Chair in the House, I simply cannot see him wanted to change shift.  He has no reason for running for Governor and for him to run for Senate would see him give up his seat for at best a 50/50 run and more importantly, give up his power in the House.  He is probably more powerful in the House than in the Senate, so I think he would stay put.  However, his district has become quite marginal, so much so even Obama won his district.  Thus, I wanted to make him safer so that his district is more in line with his views.  Additionally, I view Duffy as an asset to protect because he is young, telegenic, and could eventually be statewide material.  Thus, I wanted to move his district a few more points Republican.  This meant weakening Ribble, but I think he should still be fine in his district and I see protecting Duffy more important in the long run.  

So here we go:

First District (Gray): This district becomes significantly more Republican with the subtraction of the city of Racine, which is heavily Democratic, and the addition heavily Republican Waukesha county.  Even if Ryan were to retire, or venture a run for Senate or some White House gig, this would likely elect another Republican.  However, given Ryan’s clout in the House, I really cannot see him wanting to give that up.

Second District (Blue) This does not change that much.  Still based in heavily Democratic and fast growing Dane County.  Baldwin or any Democrat would be favored to hold.  

Third District (Yellow):  If the GOP could not take out Ron Kind this year, they will never take him out. This still contains the lean Democratic rural parts of Wisconsin. However, to help out Duffy, I added the very Democratic northern counties and subtracted some Republican-trending Minneapolis exurbs, making this district a little more Democratic.

Fourth District (Green):  This Milwaukee-based district expands to include Racine, in order to help out Ryan.  This is actually a majority non-white district.  With Milwaukee and Racine, this still remains the most Democratic and most partisan (PVI-wise) district in the state.

Fifth District (Red):  While Sensenbrenner’s district is weakened to help Ryan is still is solidly Republican. This district does contain more of Milwaukee county, but that is more than overwhelmed by the heavily Republican and heavy turnout Washington and Ozaukee counties.  While it is likely Jim will retire soon, this will return a Republican as the Democrats have basically no Bench in this area.

Sixth District (Indigo): As Petri is also liable to retire soon, this could become ripe for a pickup.  However, the district remains a lean Republican district, so it would be an uphill climb for any Democrat.  

Seventh District (Purple):  As stated above, my other goal was to help out Duffy as I can see him becoming a potential statewide threat.  The issue is that so much of this area is fundamentally swingy.  However, with the subtraction of Wausau, Stevens Point, and the Lake Superior counties (although still keeping his home in Ashland), and the addition of some Twin Cities exurbs and traditional Republican NE Wisconsin territory, this shifts a few points Republican.   This takes out a significant amount of the Democratic bench, so this should help out the freshman significantly.

Eight District  (Teal): The downside of helping out Duffy is hurting another freshman Ribble.  The territory swap is enough to perhaps swap the PVIs.  Since this district contains so many Democratic cities (Appleton, Green Bay, Wausau, Stevens Point) this might become a marginally Democrat district. However, most of this district is traditionally Republican areas, so it is not as if Ribble is being let out in the cold.  

So the conclusion of this is that the current 5-3 split in the delegation is likely to remain, with the Young Guns of the state seeing an improvement in their districts.

By: Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

Wisconsin, the badger state, constitutes a perennial battleground state. Like many of its Midwestern neighbors, the state leans Democratic but remains readily willing to vote Republican. While voting for Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama by double-digit margins, the state also came within one percent – twice – of voting for Republican candidate George W. Bush.

These voting patterns have quite interesting historical roots. Indeed, they stretch back for more than a century.

To examine these roots, let’s first take a look at a map of German immigration patterns in 1890:

More below.

This map, derived from the New York Times, graphs the percentage of German-born immigrants in each Wisconsin county from the 1890 census. There is a striking correlation between this map and Wisconsin in the 2004 presidential election:

In that election, Senator John Kerry clung to Wisconsin by a razor-thin 0.4% margin, winning 49.7% of the vote to Mr. Bush’s 49.3%. As this map indicates, counties heavily settled by Germans form the Republican voting base which Mr. Bush relied upon. This pattern persists even more than a century after the height of German immigration.

It is also still quite powerful. Out of the twelve counties with greater than 20% German-born immigrants in 1890, only one (Milwaukee) voted for Mr. Kerry.

There are exceptions, of course – and German settlement patterns do not form the entire picture of Wisconsin’s electoral demography. Milwaukee, for instance, gave 61.7% of its vote to the Massachusetts senator, despite being composed of 38.9% German immigrants in 1890. This is due to its relatively high black population today and corresponding white flight, which depleted the city of its German-American population. Scandinavian settlement patterns in non-German rural Wisconsin, to use another example, account for their Democratic vote today (interestingly, rural Wisconsin constitutes one of the last Democratic bastions in rural America).

Nevertheless, the overall pattern is still quite striking. A more detailed look at Wisconsin in 2004 only strengthens the link:

As is evident, the correlation between German immigration and Wisconsin’s electoral geography finds a resemblance in both degree and strength. The most Republican-voting regions, located along the southeastern portion of the state, also counted themselves highest in German immigrants in 1890.

Finally, this type of demographic analysis can be used to explain why states vote as they do in far more than just Wisconsin. From Democratic strongholds in former cotton-growing areas of the Deep South to South Dakota’s Native-American and Democratic-voting reservations, history offers a fascinating insight into contemporary politics.

So says the Politico:

In a major blow to Democrats, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey has told close associates that he will not seek re-election and an announcement of his plans is expected as early as Wednesday.

Obey had been expected to run for re-election in this D+3 district in Northwest Wisconsin, facing off against the winner of the GOP primary between Real World: Boston cast member (and Ashland County DA) Sean Duffy and ’08 nominee Dan Mielke. Obey won 61% against Mielke in 2008.

Obama won 56-43 here, but Kerry and Gore only scraped out meager 1-point wins. This is considered ancestrally Democratic territory, but the continued expansion of the Twin Cities exurbs is starting to have an effect.

The filing deadline is July 13th and the primary September 14th.

Just a quick hit diary to pass along this Politico report by Jonathan Martin:

Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle has told associates he will announce this week that he won’t seek a third term in 2010, POLITICO has learned. […]

Doyle’s office did not respond to POLITICO’s inquiries, but subsequently issued a one-sentence statement to Wisconsin reporters indicating that the governor would make an announcement Monday about his intentions.

With Doyle retiring, a slew of Wisconsin Democrats are likely to consider the race. That list is topped by Lt. Gov. Barbara Lawton, who has already indicated she would run if Doyle does not and who would be the state’s first female governor.

Martin goes on to speculate that Lawton may be able to run as an incumbent if President Obama brings Doyle into the administration. Doyle endorsed Obama during the primaries.

So, what does everyone think? Is this going to be an easier hold with Doyle out? He wasn’t our most endangered incumbent governor by any means, but there were some worrying signs. Last month Swing State Project downgraded this race to lean Dem.

The following are my thoughts on redistricting each of the Midwestern states-from Iowa and Missouri to Western Pennsylvania. I think in general, things look good for Dems right now, with the exceptions of Indiana and Missouri. But read on and tell me what you think.

In alphabetical order

Iowa

I think that in some ways, Iowa is the most predictable state because of the way they redraw their lines. You know that there will be a Democratic leaning 1st District in the northeast, a stronger Democratic 2nd in the southeast part, a Polk County/Des Moines based 3rd, and Steve King’s wingnut friendly 4th in the Western part of the state.

Indiana

With the GOP likely to run remap here, the consensus is that they’ll target Baron Hill by stripping him of Bloomington. I think that’s potentially dangerous, as neither Buyer or Burton are good campaigners. Furthermore, I think Baron Hill would be a great candidate for Governor, so the Indiana GOP better be careful what it wishes for……

Illinois

Two thoughts: if Kirk runs for Senate and we win his 10th (or if we win it outright), I’m guessing the ultimate target would be Judy Biggert, who’s older and less politically talented than Roskam. The best bet might be to pair them together in an ultra GOP DuPage based district and use the Dem leftovers with parts of say, the 9th to create a new Dem district.

Now my evil little thought: I wonder if we could create a Democratic leaning monstrosity with the most Democratic friendly parts of Rockford, Peoria, Champaign/Urbana, and Springfield. Yeah it’d be ugly, but so is Phil Hare’s 17th…..

Michigan

In Michigan, if Dems run remap, there are several ways to go with it. My guess is that they would draw Thad McCotter into an Ann Arbor based district that he couldn’t win-that’s by far the easiest. I also think they’ll. The other thing they should do is draw a Lansing based Democratic District drawn for Virg Bernero and give the GOP parts of the 8th to Candice Miller and pack all of the GOP’s Southeast strongholds into a single district. I suppose there’s also the outside possibility of a Dem Western district that combines the city of Grand Rapids with some of the Dem leaning counties on Lake Michigan, but I’m not sure Vern Ehlers wouldn’t win that anyways….

Minnesota

Regardless of whether the state ends up with 7 or 8 CDs, the objective of Minnesota’s redistricting plan (if Dems control, and I think they will) will be to get rid of Michele Bachmann. The only difference being how you do it. If there are 8 CDs, you simply draw a 6th that is is close to even and friendly to State Senator Tarryl Clark. If there are 7, slam her into an uber-GOP (Sherburne, Wright, Carver,Scott and the most GOP friendly parts of Dakota, Anoka, and Hennepin)  district with John Kline.

The big question here in either case is whether the DFL goes after the 3rd by swapping some of the more Democratic suburbs like St. Louis Park and Hopkins for GOP friendly stuff like Edina.

Missouri

Dems have to pray that Missouri holds onto its 9th CD so they can simply play incumbent protection and draw a more friendly 4th CD along the I-70 corridor from KC to Boone County. If Missouri goes to 8, I’m almost certain that Skelton’s district is toast.

Ohio

If Dems control redistricting and Ohio loses 2 seats, here’s some possibilities

-The basic premise is to pack the GOPers into 4 ultra GOP districts: the 4th, 5th, 7th and 8th while creating a Dem Dayton district, cracking the 14th into 3, and the 2nd into 3 parts plus creating a Democratic leaning mashup of the 18th and 12th designed for Zack Space.

-Create a Democratic 3rd by combining Montgomery County with Oxford and the most Dem friendly turf you can find in Greene.

-Eliminate Jean Schmidt’s 2nd with the Dem parts of Hamilton going to the 1st, the GOP suburban stuff splitting between the 7th and 8th CDs and the Dem leaning Ohio River Counties into the 6th.

-Drop the GOP parts of the 15th into the 4th, 5th, and 7th and pick up Dem friendly turf in Franklin. However be careful because….

-To protect Zack Space, try and take what’s left of Franklin and mate it to the friendliest portions of the 18th while dropping as much of the GOP stuff into the 7th as possible.

-Finally, crack Steve LaTourette’s 14th into 3 between Marcia Fudge’s 10th (as much of Geauga  as you can get away with), Tim Ryan’s new district (which would be something like half of Lake and what’s left of Geauga, Astabula, Trumbull and the most Dem parts of Mahoning with some Dem strength going to Boccieri in the 16th), Finally, put the other half of Lake into Kucinich’s 10th by connecting it along Lake Erie.

Pennsylvania

As I remarked in another diary, Tim Murphy is almost certainly toast because the map is likely to be redrawn by a judge due to the split in the state legislature. Flat out, there is no way that any sane judge would draw something similar to Murphy’s one step short of fictitious 18th CD that he has now. He’ll either wind up running against Murtha (and will lose) or will end up in something similar to Frank Mascara’s old 20th (which he’d lose as well).

Wisconsin

I think the best target for Wisconsin Dems, should they control the trifecta, would be to go after Paul Ryan rather than Tom Petri-its much easier to play mix and match with the heavily Democratic 2nd and 4th than it is with Petri’s 6th. Ryan’s also waaaay to conservative for his district as it is, and Petri is something of an institution in his district anyways, even if on paper it is slightly more Democratic.

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.

Note From Diarist:  This diary is primarily about the Presidential campaign.  I wrote it for Daily Kos but didn’t feel it got the exposure I was hoping for.  It’s very much inside baseball politics so I thought it might have some fans around here, but it is about the Presidential campaign which I know is no longer the focus of the website.  If the moderator wishes to delete it, I’ll understand.

Anybody following the horse race at all has a pretty good idea where the key battlegrounds are expected to be. My personal opinion is that the three markets that are most likely to determine the 2008 election winner are, in this order, Denver (including Boulder and Fort Collins), Detroit, and Northern Virginia. Beyond those three, there are at least a dozen markets in key battleground states that will be sucking up the vast majority of campaign resources in the next 50-some days until the election. That’s the way the game is played and always will be for as long as the Electoral College is a reality. My thought process this morning was dedicated to isolating some geographic hotspots that are perhaps under-the-radar of conventional wisdom yet could nonetheless be very productive investments of time and resources for the Obama campaign. The top-10 I came up with are listed below in descending order.

10. Flagstaff, Arizona–Because it’s John McCain’s home state, nobody expects Arizona to be a swing state in 2008. It probably won’t be, but the most recent poll released from the state showed McCain leading by only six in Arizona, a smaller lead than he held in the expected battleground state of Nevada. The Obama campaign needs to do some internal polling in Arizona and see if their findings reflect the recent polling of a single-digit McCain lead. If it is, I think it would be entirely worthwhile to pour some campaign dollars in the less-expensive media market of Flagstaff, which is already favorable Democratic terrain, and also to set up a campaign stop there. It would be very embarrassing for the McCain campaign if Obama went to the university town of Flagstaff and filled the streets with tens of thousands of screaming fans in McCain’s backyard. Obviously this is not something we’re likely to see in the closing weeks of the campaign, but for headfake value alone, it’s something worth doing in September.

9. Aberdeen, South Dakota–I’ve seen only one poll coming out of South Dakota, and it showed McCain with a scant four-point lead. I don’t expect Obama to win there, but I’m puzzled why the prospect of a competitive South Dakota is not even being discussed even when the polls are similar to those of North Dakota, which is a battleground. Aberdeen is a worthwhile target for a September campaign stop and television ads for a number of reasons. This is the Democratic part of South Dakota. Tim Johnson and Stephanie Herseth pulled out statewide victories in 2002 and 2004 by running up the score in the counties in and around Aberdeen. Given that the Democrats have adopted a much more friendly platform to controversial-everywhere-but-the-Corn-Belt biofuels than Republicans in 2008, Obama could pick off alot of GOP-leaning farmers in eastern South Dakota who don’t trust McCain’s commitment to agriculture. Beyond that, Obama could do a rally with hometown boy Tom Daschle and really make some connections to voters who were out of reach for Gore and Kerry. I’m not certain about particulars of the Aberdeen media market, but I suspect it would be one of the cheapest in the country for advertising, and cuts into portions of North Dakota making it even more useful.

8. Wheeling, West Virginia–I have a good friend who lives deep into the hollers of Logan County, WV, and still insists from her interactions that she believes Obama will win West Virginia. I suspect that puts her in a minority small enough to count on one hand, but I still think some outreach effort into West Virginia would be valuable, particularly in the Wheeling area. Obama essentially ceded West Virginia to Hillary in the primary, making only one campaign stop in Charleston on the eve of the primary. Voters there don’t know him, but I suspect that if more do, the margin for McCain in the state could potentially be far less lopsided than if he doesn’t set foot there. More importantly though, I think Wheeling is important for the same reason it was important for Kerry four years ago. The market cuts into Ohio and Pennsylvania, specifically the very blue-collar regions of Ohio and Pennsylvania where Obama has the most work to do to win over skeptics. I suspect campaigning in this area is something of a defensive move, meaning his best hope is probably to cut losses rather than win over Bush voters, but in the context of controlling losses within statewide races in OH and PA, the old adage that the best offense is a good defense certainly seems to apply.

7. Council Bluffs, Iowa–Each new round of poll numbers indicate that Iowa appears less likely to ultimately be a battleground state, with Obama managing double-digit leads in the state. Again, I surmise that the untold story accounting for Obama’s strong performance throughout the Corn Belt (even Indiana!) is ethanol, specifically McCain’s previous hard-line opposition to it. The reason Council Bluffs is a secret weapon is twofold. It’s location in the heavily Republican southwest side of Iowa means the Obama campaign is on offense there, competing for traditionally Republican votes in western Iowa, but also competing for votes in Omaha, Nebraska, just across the Missouri River from Council Bluffs. We don’t hear much anymore about the prospect of Obama winning one (or even two) of the electoral votes in eastern Nebraska, and it remains a longshot. Nonetheless, raising Obama’s presence in western Iowa will have spillover effect in Omaha and the corn farmers surrounding it in Nebraska, leaving the prospect of robbing McCain of a Nebraska electoral vote on the table while simultaneously running up the score in Iowa.

6. Durango, Colorado–Chances are, the suburban doughnut surrounding Denver will decide who wins Colorado’s nine electoral votes, but if the race is as close there as most suspect it will end up being, smaller Colorado markets loom large. The fast-changing demography of Colorado was abundantly clear in the 2004 election, and perhaps no place was the change more obvious than Durango, formerly a Republican stronghold in Colorado’s southwest corner, where population growth is apparently fronted by left-leaning young people drawn to the area’s ski culture. I believe there were only five counties in America that Bill Clinton never won in 1992 or 1996, but where John Kerry won in 2004. La Plata County, Colorado, home of Durango, was one of them. If we assume that the trendlines that had clearly transformed Durango in 2004 have continued, Obama should be able to grow upon Kerry’s margin rather significantly in the area in 2008. The fact that neighboring battleground state New Mexico is a few miles south of Durango is an an additional bullet point for its utility.

5. South Bend, Indiana–Congressman Joe Donnelly showed us the potential northern Indiana holds for Democrats if we simply try there. The lesson appears to be learned as Indiana is deemed a battleground state in 2008. South Bend strikes me as the most consequential market in Indiana. Notre Dame University gives Obama a youthful base of operation while simultaneously providing Obama an outreach to Catholic voters, a demographic long cited as one of his most difficult to reach. The South Bend market also reaches into southwestern Michigan, and despite fairly encouraging polls of late, I think Obama will ultimately need all the help in can get in Michigan. Probably outside of the South Bend market but still worthy of mention is another Indiana town in Joe Donnelly’s Congressional district, Kokomo. This is a blue-collar factory town that Democrats should be winning, but rarely do. Voters in Kokomo may be some of the most likely to swing if the Obama campaign reaches out to them in a serious way.

4. Elko, Nevada–In 2004, it seemed like John Kerry was spending more time in Republican-leaning Reno than in Democratic-leaning Las Vegas. I didn’t really understand it at the time, until I saw the election returns and noticed Kerry had significantly cut into the GOP’s advantage in Reno and surrounding areas. The reason Kerry lost Nevada was that he got absolutely destroyed in rural Nevada. Obama, by contrast, beat Hillary in most rural Nevada counties, meaning there’s at least a basis for thinking he could overperform Kerry in places like Elko. Campaigning and advertising in Elko would really be taking Kerry’s 2004 effort to go on offense in Reno to the next level. Considering Kerry got less than 20% of the vote in Nevada’s fourth most populous county, worse than both Mondale and Dukakis did back in the day, there’s easily room for improvement in the area, and even a little improvement upstate Nevada could be the difference in the state.

3. Cincinnati, Ohio–Now considering Cincinnati is the third-largest media market in what is considered perhaps the most critical battleground state, calling for an Obama campaign presence there is on the surface a no-brainer, but most importantly, I see metropolitan Cincinnati as the region of Ohio where Obama is best-positioned to make gains over John Kerry. Kerry narrowly lost Hamilton County (home of the city of Cincinnati and the core of its suburbs), but with a high African-American turnout in 2008, I strongly expect the county to turn blue. Just as important are the three crimson red exurban counties surrounding Cincinnati, which accounted for Bush’s entire margin of victory in Ohio in 2004. In every election since 2004, the needle has moved dramatically against Republicans in all of these counties (Butler, Clermont, and Warren), with Jean Schmidt, Ken Blackwell, and Mike DeWine, all badly underperforming traditional GOP margins in the area. If Obama can keep this trendline going and trim his losses by a few percentage points in suburban Cincinnati, it will go a long way towards offsetting his likely underperformance in the rural portions of Ohio. And to whatever extent the Cincinnati market is an outreach into Indiana is also a feather in our cap.

2. Michigan’s Upper Peninsula–With the racial polarization of metropolitan Detroit, enflamed by the Kwame Kilpatrick scandal, and Obama’s call for tougher CAFE standards fiercely opposed by Detroit automakers, the McCain campaign has some serious ammunition against Obama to take into Michigan. I fully expect Obama will underperform Gore and Kerry in metropolitan Detroit. With that in mind, the thought process should become where we can pick up additional votes in Michigan to offset the possible hemorrhaging in the population centers. To that end, it seems like a no-brainer for Obama to take his campaign up north…way up north. The blue-collar Upper Peninsula of Michigan is sparsely populated, but its demographics seem to align with other Midwestern areas that are Obama-friendly. More to the point, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan looks like Wisconsin, thinks like Wisconsin, and votes like Wisconsin. When you look at Obama’s healthy standing in Wisconsin polls compared to Kerry four years ago or Gore’s eight years ago, my thinking is that every Obama campaign rally that begins in Green Bay should make the quick drive to Marquette, Michigan, from there.

1. Fargo-Moorhead (North Dakota/Minnesota)–I suspect there is no other media market in the country where the needle will move more significantly in Obama’s favor compared to 2000 and 2004 than Fargo-Moorhead. To the extent that North Dakota has already been identified as a battleground state, Obama’s campaign already has a presence in the area, but may nonetheless not appreciate just how many things are working to their candidate’s favor here. First of all, the cities of Fargo and Moorhead are islands of youth in a region otherwise dominated by gray hair. That cuts to Obama’s advantage demographically. Furthermore, in addition to Obama’s more farmer-friendly stand on biofuels, the Democrats have an additional ace-in-the-hole here because the region is one of the nation’s top sugar-growing areas. The sugar industry has enjoyed its relative “cartel” status and has become decidedly protectionist since the passage of CAFTA in 2005, a vote which helped every Democrat on the ticket in Minnesota in 2006 score landslide margins in the Red River Valley. Particularly on the Minnesota side, this area is historically Democratic, even though both Gore and Kerry were destroyed here. This advantage on both sides of the river extends further to the Grand Forks area, a region of North Dakota where every Democrat needs to win big in a competitive statewide race. It’s expected that Minnesota is leaning heavily Obama, but don’t underestimate the pseudo-maverick image of John McCain fooling alot of moderate suburbanites in Minneapolis-St. Paul. That raises the stakes for Obama’s need to win in places like the Red River Valley, which early indications suggest he is poised to do.