Swing State Project

In a similar vein to my previous diary “A Democratic Nebraska” I moved a state south to see how Democratic a Kansan congressional district can be. However, early on I noticed that it was actually possible to make two districts in Kansas with a democratic lean, albeit a very, very slight democratic lean. As in the past the numbers are hand tabulated and should be quite accurate.

CD1(Blue): 53.5% Obama 73/9/10 W/B/H

The blight on the landscape that is CD1 stretches its hideous legs out from its nominal centre in Emporia to swallow up Pittsburg, Parsons, Wichita, Hutchinson, Manhattan, Junction City, Topeka, and parts of Lawrence whilst nimbly avoiding republican counties with any sort of significant population.    

CD2(Green): 53.5% Obama 76/9/10 W/B/H

Compared in to CD1 CD2 is has a positively tidy shape. Based in Kansas City (the part that is in Kansas anyway) it runs up along the Missouri through Leavenworth to Atchison and south into the more Democratic parts of Johnson county before turning west into the heart of Lawrence.    

CD3(Dark Magenta): 35.0% Obama 88/2/5 W/B/H

South-eastern Kansas wrapping around CD1. It would be a neater district if it was just southern Kansas and didn’t turn north-east at Hutchinson, honestly I just didn’t want to reassign the precincts south of Manhattan.

CD4(Red): 29.6% Obama 83/1/13 W/B/H

The rest of Kansas. Mostly the western and northern parts of the state but it does follow the Oklahoma state line quite a way east.

The single so called “super-democratic” district turned out to be 57.6% Obama (74/10/11 W/B/H) and appears below.

I decided to attempt redistricting Arizona, with its requirements for districts based around communities of interest. Arizona will pick up a 9th Congressional seat in 2012, though it’s tough to say which is the ‘new’ seat in my map as I moved a lot of things around in the Phoenix metro area. Changes elsewhere were less radical.

Caveats: While the district populations are all roughly equal in DRA, they have the potential to be out of whack in reality, particularly in Pinal County, I’m told. Also, I have little first hand knowledge of Arizona and am going mostly off of what I’ve read in other diaries, so cue Nico picking this apart in 3…2…1

So, here goes:

Statewide

Phoenix Metro

Tucson Metro

Arizona’s 1st Congressional District

Demos: 59% White, 1% Black, 20% Native American, 18% Hispanic, 1% Asian, 1% Otther

Description: Similar to the current 1st, though it sheds most of the non-rural Pinal stuff and picks up rural parts of Cochise and the rural portions of Maricopa instead. The district, as drawn is designed to keep as many rural interests in the state together as possible. The swaps have made this a more Republican district than the current 1st, but I’m guessing that it’s definitely winnable for the right kind of Democrat.

Arizona’s 2nd Congressional District

Demos: 74% White, 3% Black, 2% Native American, 2% Asian, 17% Hispanic, 1% Other

The 2nd stays similar to its current configuration. It does pick up all of La Paz County from the current 8th, but the western Phoenix suburbs, including most of Glendale, dominate here. So, what you have are two communities of interest: the smaller cities on the Western half of the state and the bulk of the West Valley of Phoenix. Should send a GOPer to Congress.

Arizona’s 3rd Congressional District

Demos: 79% White, 2% Black, 1% Native American, 3% Asian, 13% Hispanic, 1% Other

The 3rd remains a North Phoenix dominated district. However, it sheds Central Phoenix to the new 6th and picks up North Scottsdale and Paradise Valley from the old 5th. What I’m aiming for here is to combine the wealthier suburbs into a single district. I’m guessing that even Ben Quayle is probably safe here, and any other GOPer would have a job for life.

Arizona’s 4th Congressional District

Demos: 72% White, 3% Black, 1% Native American, 2% Asian, 20% Hispanic, 1% Other

The new 4th contains the whiter, farther out 2nd ring suburbs of Phoenix (East Mesa and Gilbert) along with the bulk of Pinal County. I’m not going to lie-this configuration is largely because aside from the Indian reservations and the rural parts, I wasn’t quite sure how to carve up Pinal, so I figured that keeping it mostly together (minus the Indian Reservations in the 8th and the rural east in the 1st) as a community of interest wasn’t the worst idea in the world. I’m guessing this is a GOP slam dunk.

Arizona’s 5th Congressional District

Demos: 22% White, 9% Black, 2% Native American, 2% Asian, 65% Hispanic, 1% Other

This is basically the current 4th CD, except that it loses the whiter portions of Central Phoenix to the new 6th and gains a little more population in the West Valley. Best Dem district in the state from a PVI perspective.

Arizona’s 6th Congressional District

Demos: 50% White, 5% Black, 3% Native American, 4% Asian, 37% Hispanic, 2% Other

Tempe plus Central Phoenix in a district that, to me anyways, makes a huge amount of sense as it brings together two ASU campuses plus the seat of government. I think of this as the Texas 25th of Arizona, a white, liberalish seat; say hello to some sort of Democrat here.

Arizona’s 7th Congressional District

Demos: 65% White, 3% Black, 4% Native American, 2% Asian, 24% Hispanic, 2% Other

The aim here was to bring together a bunch of first and second tier suburbs located to the east of downtown Phoenix together in a district. The district is comprised of West Mesa, Ahwatukee, Chandler, and Southern Scottsdale. I know that Chandler is swingy, and West Mesa is D friendly, but know nothing about Ahwatukee and the portion of Scottsdale in the district.

Arizona’s 8th Congressional District

Demos: 32% White, 3% Black, 5% Native American, 1% Asian, 58% Hispanic, 1% Other

This is a lot like the old 7th, though it sheds La Paz to the 7th, parts of central Tucson (including the University of Arizona) into the 9th. In exchange, it picks up some Hispanic heavy turf in Maricopa in the West Valley and the rest of Sierra Vista, and is in the end, several points more Hispanic than the old district (though what this translates to in VAP is unknown); should send some flavor of Dem back to Congress.

Arizona’s 9th Congressional District

Demos: 73% White, 3% Black, 1% Native American, 3% Asian, 18% Hispanic, 2% Other

Picks up white liberals in Tucson and sheds eastern Cochise and the Sierra Vista portions. The two big military installations are here as a community of interest, along with Eastern Tucson. Gabby would do very well here, but as an open seat I’d guess that it’s still definitely winnable for either party.

Arizona is gaining one seat, from eight up to nine, and that means that its new target is 710,224, up from 641K in 2000. Interestingly, despite the fact that it’s gaining a new seat, there are still three currently-composed districts that are in a deficit and need to pick up people from elsewhere: the 3rd, 4th, and 5th. These are the three central districts in the Phoenix area that are essentially built out and can’t expand in any direction (except up); meanwhile, the 2nd, 6th, and 7th can continue to expand every which way into the desert, which is precisely what they did over the decade, so look for one additional GOP-friendly seat to be carved out of Phoenix’s endless suburbia (although whether it’s centered in Phoenix’s west or east suburbs remains to be seen… between the commission’s role in deciding, and possible multiple incumbents opening up seats to run for the Senate, there really aren’t any clues what will happen).

Like the other border states, Arizona has become signficantly more Hispanic over the decade, up to 29.6% Hispanic now compared with 25.3% in 2000. The Hispanic growth wasn’t concentrated any one particular place: that 4% increase was closely mirrored in all the districts. The 2nd had the biggest Hispanic shift, at 7% (from 14% to 21%), while the 1st had the smallest shift, at 3% (from 16% to 19%). That dissipation of the Hispanic vote means that it’s not terribly likely that a third VRA seat will be carved out, despite the fact that Hispanics are close to 1/3 of the state’s population.

I’m not the first one to observe that Idaho redistricting is pretty much drama-free. Nevertheless, there’s at least something interesting going on here in this small but fast-growing state: growth is very heavily concentrated in suburbs and exurbs west of Boise. For instance, the state’s 2nd and 3rd biggest cities used to be Pocatello and Idaho Falls; now they’re Meridian (a large suburb west of Boise) and Nampa (in Canyon County, the next county to the west). That means that the districts are kind of lopsided, and it looks like much of Boise proper, currently split down the middle, will wind up being given to ID-02. While Boise is certainly the most urbane part of the state, and it should tip the balance a bit in the blue direction (as for the past decade, the two districts have had almost identical PVIs), the 2nd should still be a long way away from somewhere the Dems can compete. (Idaho’s target is 783,791, up from 646K in 2000. Look for it to get a 3rd seat in 2020.)

Wisconsin held steady at eight seats this year, and even its districts held pretty steady, too. Its target is 710,873, up from 670K in 2000. That means the only district that lost population is the Milwaukee-based 4th and even it only lost a few thousand since 2000. The main area of growth is the state’s other blue stronghold, the Madison-area 2nd (must have something to do with THE BLOATED STATE GOVERNMENT AND THOSE GREEDY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES MULTIPLYING LIKE LOCUSTS!!!!1!!), which needs to give about 40,000 people to the 4th (although they’ll have to pass through the suburban 5th, which sits smack dab between them). Also, it looks like Dairyland is gaining a little at the expense of the North Woods, as the 3rd will need to pick up 20K from GOP freshman Sean Duffy’s 7th. Although the GOP controls the redistricting process here, thanks to their House gains in 2010 and the overall uniform swinginess of the rural counties, they’re probably just going to be playing defense with their map.

Virginia was really bad for democrats in 2010 (what state wasn’t?). The republicans picked up the 2nd, 5th, and 9th. As I am a democrat I usually make maps leaning that way so I decided to make a republican map. This is an 8-2-1 map and preserves the VRA district while weakening only Morgan Griffith and Cantor a bit.  It’s not perfect but I think it pretty good. For those who don’t know, in the individual district pictures, light green is new district only, pink is old only, and the darkish green is areas in both.

District 1



Incumbent: Rob Wittman

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: 176

Obama: 47.8%

McCain: 52.2%

Dem: 44.6%

GOP:  55.6%

White: 67.2 %

Black: 20.6 %

Hispanic: 6.3%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target: 45,520

Obama: 48.4%

McCain: 51.6%

Dem: 44.8%

GOP:  55.2%

White: 67.7 %

Black: 19.6 %

Hispanic: 6.8%

The 1st had to lose some population and so it moved a bit, but it is largely unchanged with the exception of taking up a little more of the suburbs in SE Virginia.  Likely R

District 2:



Incumbent: Scot Rigell

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: -26

Obama: 49.2%

McCain: 50.8%

Dem:  46.4%

GOP:  53.6%

White: 65.7%

Black: 20.4%

Hispanic: 6.0%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target:  -70,482

Obama:  52.4%

McCain: 47.6%

Dem: 49.1%

GOP:  50.9%

White: 62.6%

Black: 21.7%

Hispanic: 6.9%

Nye was elected on the backs of two very poor republican congressmen. While he is young, attractive, and from Philadelphia (awww yeah), with this new district he would not have won in 08. Rigell’s biggest worry is the primary with his donations to Obama and all that jazz. This seat mainly took what district one gave up.  Likely R

District 3:



Incumbent: Robert Scott

New Stats:

Deviation from Target:  -267

Obama: 82.2%

McCain: 17.8%

Dem:  76.9%

GOP:  23.1%

White: 28.9%

Black: 61.0%

Hispanic: 5.3%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target: -53,960

Obama: 75.7%

McCain: 24.3%

Dem:  28.7%

GOP:  71.3%

White: 36.2%

Black: 53.7%

Hispanic: 5.0%

Mr. Scott would probably be happy with this district as it gets more black and democratic. The district did have to pick up people, and it did this by snaking to as many areas of strength as possible.  I have to say it is horrendous looking. The VRA  mapping standards I have mixed feelings about… Yes they are good for protecting the rights of minorities. This though? Ugh. Safe D

District 4:



Incumbent: Randy Forbes

New Stats:

Deviation from Target:  -255

Obama: 48.8%

McCain:  51.2%

Dem: 46.4%

GOP:  53.6%

White: 61.7%

Black: 28%

Hispanic: 5.3%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target:

Obama: 51.0%

McCain: 49.0%

Dem:  48.2%

GOP:   51.8%

White: 57.8%

Black: 33.2%

Hispanic: 4.5%

Randy Forbes is unfortunately a skilled politician.  While he wins in a current Obama district easily, I don’t think anyone in the GOP would mind his district getting a bit safer. The only serious challenge he had was his first against Louise Lucas in the 2001 special election. Likely R.

District 5:



Incumbent: Robert Hurt

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: 122

Obama:  43.3%

McCain:  56.7%

Dem: 42.7%

GOP:  57.3%

White: 75.1%

Black: 19.5%

Hispanic: 2.7%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target: -39,711

Obama:  48.5%

McCain:  51.5%

Dem: 47.3%

GOP:  52.7%

White: 71.7%

Black: 21.9%

Hispanic: 3.1%

5 is the most important district. Perriello is not in this district, and half of his base in Charlottesville is gone. Included, however is Rick Boucher.  Neither Boucher or Perriello has much to run, as they both have a lot of new constitutions AND the district is 5 points more republican than it was before.  Safe R unless Perriello or Boucher run, than Likely R.

District 6:



Incumbent: Bob Goodlatte

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: -43

Obama:  43.9%

McCain: 56.1%

Dem: 42.8%

GOP:  57.2%

White: 81.5%

Black: 10.9%

Hispanic: 4.2%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target: -23,285  

Obama:  43.2%

McCain: 56.8%

Dem: 42.1%

GOP:  57.9%

White: 81.2%

Black: 11.1%

Hispanic: 4.3%

This close save district remains close to safe. Little changes, mostly just to fill in where other districts no longer are because it was lacking population. Likely R.

District 7:



Incumbent: Eric Cantor

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: -601

Obama: 48.1%

McCain:  51.9%

Dem:  43.4%

GOP:  56.6%

White: 68.9%

Black: 14.5%

Hispanic: 8.6%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target: 25,081

Obama: 46.6%

McCain: 53.4%

Dem: 43.3%

GOP:  56.7%

White: 72.3%

Black: 16.7%

Hispanic:  4.8%

Snaking into Prince William to shore in place of 1 and 11, the partisan numbers actually don’t change all that much as the district loses parts of Richmond. I kept in the most conservative precincts because I figure that’s where Cantor lives. Cantor should be fine. Likely R

District 8:



Incumbent:  Jim Moran

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: 531

Obama: 68.2%

McCain: 31.8%

Dem:  67.7%

GOP:  33.3%

White:  53.9%

Black: 13.2%

Hispanic: 18.4%

Asian: 11.4%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target: -27,688

Obama:  68.2%

McCain: 31.8%

Dem: 67.7%

GOP:  33.3%

White: 54.4%

Black: 13.3%

Hispanic: 18.4%

Asian: 10.7%

Almost unchanged, just look at demographics. Safe D

District 9:



Incumbent: Morgan Griffiths

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: -196

Obama: 43.4%

McCain: 56.6%

Dem: 45.7%

GOP:  54.3%

White: 88.8%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target:  -72,764

Obama: 40.3%

McCain: 59.7%

Dem: 43.7%

GOP:  56.3%

White: 92%

The district had to gain people and Griffith’s home of Salem. The district got more democratic by taking in parts of Charlottesville and some of its suburbs to weaken cut Periello’s base in two. Periello resides in this district but might still choose to run in the 5th.   Likely R, will move to Safe fairly soon as Griffith’s gains name recognition throughout the district.

District 10:



Incumbent: Frank Wolf

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: -98

Obama: 49.4%

McCain: 50.6%

Dem: 48.1%

GOP:  51.9%

White: 66.9%

Hispanic: 10.7%

Asian: 13.5%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target: 144,282

Obama: 50.2%

McCain: 49.8%

Dem: 47.2%

GOP:  52.8%

White: 63.8%

Hispanic: 13.5%

Asian: 12.4%

Wolf has won for 30 years straight, usually with ease. His district is now a McCain district but it only moved by about .8%. Lean/Likely R

District 11:



Incumbent: Gerry Connolly

New Stats:

Deviation from Target: 645

Obama: 55.6%

McCain: 44.4%

Dem: 50.5%

GOP:  49.5%

White: 54.4%

Black:  10.2%

Hispanic: 16.9%

Asian: 14.9%

Old Stats:

Deviation from Target: 62,964

Obama: 56.6%

McCain: 43.4%

Dem: 52.3%

GOP:  47.7%

White: 55.0%

Black: 11.1%

Hispanic: 15.4%

Asian: 14.9%

This district becomes more swingy by taking away some liberal territory like Dale City and giving to Eric Cantor. Leans slightly D but I’d call it a toss-up. Connolly would have lost in 2010 with this district.

According to the Nevada News Bureau:

Two reliable sources have confirmed that Congressman Dean Heller said this week he is definitely committed to running in the U.S. Senate race. Heller’s office would not confirm the news this morning when contacted.

Heller’s decision comes as no surprise on the tail of Senator John Ensign’s announcement Monday not to seek a third term. Heller had already signaled his ambitions when his office leaked an internal poll last month showing he was the strongest candidate in a GOP field (that included Ensign) by a 15-point margin.

Jon Ralston also confirms:

Heller is in and has been since he got poll back. They have not set official announce date. But sooner because of Ensign exit.

Sharron Angle, you know you want to.

Looks like we – and by we, I mean they – will have a serious fight on our hands:

New Mexico Lt. Gov. John Sanchez is poised to join former Rep. Heather Wilson in the Republican primary for the Land of Enchantment’s open Senate seat, according to GOP sources. The move sets up the likelihood of heated GOP primary that could test the loyalties of newly elected Gov. Susana Martinez (R).

Sanchez, who is putting together a campaign team and plans a trip to Washington, D.C., later this month, ran on a ticket with Martinez in their successful 2010 campaign.

Sanchez obviously wants to present himself as the “true conservative” alternative to the apostate Wilson, but he’s not an especially impressive figure and thus he might not be the last person to enter the race. Teabaggers are rarely satisfied with establishment types, even archetypally wingnutty ones, so I could see a “true, TRUE conservative” also trying to make a go of it.

Sanchez does have one important attribute: money. In fact, he’s self-funded most of his campaigns. Of course, this is a two-edged sword – the sort of laziness that’s borne of self-funding can really hurt you in a low-turnout primary where grassroots excitement is a key factor. When people give money to your campaign, they are also buying in to it. You create a cadre of individuals who really care about the outcome and will often do more than just donate a single time. We’ll see whether Sanchez understands this.

UPDATE: Grr – looks like the fight right now is actually between Roll Call and The Hill. The latter publication is taking exception to the former’s initial report, saying:

New Mexico Republicans expect the Senate primary field to grow, but an associate close to Lt. Gov. John Sanchez (R) said an announcement about his intentions isn’t “imminent.” …

A report on Thursday indicated that Sanchez was “poised” to enter the race. But a close associate of the lt. governor called that “premature.”

“Expectations of an imminent announcement are premaure,” the associate of Sanchez told The Ballot Box, noting the Republican was focused on the current legislative session, which runs through noon on March 19.

• CA-Sen: We can probably rule out another Senate run by Chuck DeVore: he’s setting his sights lower… much, much lower. Chuck D is, in fact, forming an exploratory committee for Orange County’s Third District Board of Supervisors. An exploratory committee!

Somewhat related, yet another chart from Greg Giroux: The most recent Gov, Sen, and Pres numbers by CD in California, as well as key demographics highlights from the new census data.

• MA-Sen: And yet another Greg Giroux special. (If you’re not following this guy on Twitter, you are using Twitter wrong.) Alan Khazei (D) has formed a 527 exploratory committee “for a potential run for public office.” I’m not exactly clear, though, on why it’s a 527 rather than a normal FEC exploratory committee.

• MD-Sen: Remember when Dick Cheney ran the Republican operation to choose a vice presidential candidate in 2000… and picked himself? GOPer Eric Wargotz has managed to come up with an even more pathetic form of self-love: He’s created his own “Draft Eric Wargotz” page on Facebook. In case the name doesn’t ring a bell, he was 26-point roadkill for Barbara Mikulski last cycle, but now he wants the public to rapturously embrace a run against Maryland’s other Democratic senator, Ben Cardin. (By the way, this is my favorite comment so far.)

• ME-Sen: I meant to mention this in yesterday’s post on PPP’s poll, but in any event, state House Minority Leader Emily Cain (D), all of thirty years old and already on the verge of being term-limited out, isn’t ruling out a run against Olympia Snowe, but says it probably won’t happen. Even though she’s just barely eligible to run under the constitution, she’d has a bitchin’ campaign theme song just waiting to get rocked out.

• MO-Sen: I had a feeling things might wind up moving in this direction. Jan. 27:

However, the offices of Republican Reps. Blaine Luetkemeyer and Todd Akin told Roll Call that the Congressmen are not interested in running for the Senate.

Feb. 26:

“Some people want to draft me for Senate but you know engineers. It’s just one thing at a time,” said Akin, an engineer.

Mar. 9:

“I haven’t discounted it,” [Akin] told The Ballot Box on Tuesday night. “Some things you sort of put on your problem shelf and you know you’re going to deal with it at some time. It’s just one of those things that I’ve got to work through.

Todd Akin can’t resist the siren song of the Senate race – not with the field of damaged Republican B-listers gathering on the misty plains of Missouri. Just one question: Is “problem shelf” common engineer-speak, or is Akin just a special brand of dweeb?

As for this, it seems like classic Politico ginned-up b.s. So Claire McCaskill spends less taxpayer money on air travel than Kit Bond or Jim Talent, but because Politico makes a big deal out of her using a plane she co-owns with a group of investors, it becomes campaign fodder. Hopefully, with McCaskill saying she’ll reimburse Treasury for the costs, this’ll be a one-day story, unless Politico decides this move makes her look “guilty” (of what, I don’t know).

• NV-Sen: Rep. Shelley Berkley says she’s doing some polling right now and is still on track to make a decision in late spring/early summer. (I guess that’s somewhere between May 1 and August 1.) Berkley also reports that she’s been in contact with all the members of the B Team – Secretary of State Ross Miller, Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto and State Treasurer Kate Marshall – and: “They all said the exact same thing, ‘We’re waiting on you, we love you and then we’ll make our decision.'”

• OH-Sen: Usually I ignore politicians when they comment on races – most of what they say is clueless or canned. But I love Ted Strickland, and you’ll love his incredulous reaction when he was asked what he thought of the possibility of GOP state Treasurer Josh Mandel challenging Sen. Sherrod Brown. Said Teddy Ballgame: “Give me a break, that is laughable. I don’t think that would be a contest at all.” And he went on from there – click through for the rest. (Incidentally, I came across this amusing tidbit thanks to the Google: Back in 2006, when running for state Rep., Mandel refused to say whether he was supporting Republican gubernatorial nominee Ken Blackwell – or, yeah, Ted Strickland.)

• WI-Sen: This is just so mega-weird I won’t bother trying to summarize:

When questioned about his reelection plans by National Journal Tuesday, 76-year-old Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) asked, “Am I running?” He then shrugged, wordlessly. Kohl then asked “are you are a reporter?” Told “yes,” he walked away without a word.

In response to further media inquiries, an undoubtedly groaning staffer said that Kohl “will announce his decision later this year” as to whether he’ll run again. What worries me the most, honestly, is DSCC chair Patty Murray’s response to questions about Wisconsin’s very senior senator: “Herb’s just great.” Really, this is the kind of thing a committee leader needs to be on top of. There are ways to evade questions (“I know Herb is still making up his mind”), and then there are ways to just look evasive – and this is the latter.

• WV-Sen: Yep, like I said, long two years.

• CT-Gov, CT-Sen: Quinnipiac has approvals for Gov. Dan Malloy (35-40), Sen. Joe Lieberman (38-45), Sen. Richard Blumenthal (49-25), Barack Obama (49-47). That last number in particular seems rather low to me. I wonder what Quinnipiac’s sample composition is… but they ain’t sharin’.

• ME-Gov: A Republican state senator proposed a state constitutional amendment which would institute gubernatorial run-offs if no candidate got a majority of the vote on election day (something that has happened in four of the the last five gov races). The bill would have a high hurdle to become law, though – two-thirds of the legislature would have to vote for it, and it would also have to go before voters.

• NJ-01: Rep. Rob Andrews, as though dipped in the cranberry bogs of the Pine Barrens, has renewed his soul and emerged as that unlikeliest of legislators: a Nancy Pelosi ally. Andrews was best known for dodgy behavior and fratricidal tendencies, but a period in the wilderness after his humiliation at the hands of Frank Lautenberg has apparently turned him into a better man. Read the article for the complete picture.

• NM-01: Former state Rep. Janice Arnold-Jones, who gave up her House seat in a failed bid for the GOP gubernatorial nomination last year, says she’s forming an exploratory committee to look at a challenge to Rep. Martin Heinrich. Heinrich is considering a run for Senate (something Arnold-Jones was also looking at), so she may have an opportunity for an open-seat run if that happens. Arnold-Jones staged an abortive bid for this seat the last time it was open, in 2008.

• NY-26: Good news! We finally have a date for the special election to replace ex-Rep. Chris Lee: May 24th. Even better news! Democrats are finally getting their act together and will be interviewing short-listed candidates this week and next. Those names: Erie County Clerk Kathy Hochul; Amherst town council member Mark Manna; former Amherst Town supervisor Satish Mohan; and Some Dudes Robert Stall, Martin Minemier, Jane Bauch, and Diana Voit. Meanwhile, teabagger David Bellavia says he’s still considering petitioning his way on to the ballot as an independent, but the clock is fast running down.

• Wisconsin Recall: So the Republicans running the rump of the Wisconsin state Senate managed to pass (or think they’ve passed) their union-busting measures without the need for a quorum. (Read the link for the full procedural run-down.) The lone no vote was Dale Schultz, who isn’t elligible for recall this year but does sit in one of the two-bluest districts held by a Republican, according to SSP’s now-seminal analysis.

• NY-St. Sen: The frogs get marched out one by one, hurrah, hurrah! The frogs get marched out one by one, hurrah – hurrah! Scumdog state Sen. Carl Kruger (D, sadly) just turned himself in to the FBI on corruption charges. Among Kruger’s many sins, he threatened to caucus with the Republicans in after the Democrats won back the chamber for the first time in generations back in 2008. He also voted against the gay marriage bill that came up late in 2009. Unfortunately, Kruger holds the second-reddest seat in the entire state (amazingly enough, though, it’s 45% Obama, thanks to the GOP’s awesome gerrymander). If he steps down, it’ll be an exceptionally difficult hold, though, since Dems control very few seats where Obama did worse than 60%.

• Maps: The Atlantic has a cool interactive map featuring the “12 States of America” – the US, broken up at the county level into varying socio-economic groupings (with cutesy names, of course).

• Special Elections: Johnny Longtorso is now contributing special election results wrap-ups:

In Arkansas HD-24, Republican Bruce Cozart emerged victorious by a 60-40 margin. Tennessee’s SD-18 was no surprise, with a 2-1 margin for Republican Kerry Roberts. In California’s AD-04, the lone Democrat, Dennis Campanale, made it into first place, albeit with only around 32%, and will face Republican Beth Gaines, who squeaked past fellow Republican John Allard by a 1% margin (22.5 to 21.5), in the May runoff. [The first CA race to feature a run-off under the new top-two system. – David]

Also, a quick shout-out to the newest member of the Tennessee House (HD-98), Democrat Antonio “2 Shay” Parkinson, and the newest member of the Virginia House of Delegates (HD-91), Republican Gordon Helsel, both of whom were unopposed on Tuesday.

• State Leges: Louis Jacobson of Governing magazine has an interesting look at various proposals in several states to shrink the sizes of their respective legislatures. However, if history is any guide, most of these won’t go anywhere.

Redistricting Roundup:

• New Jersey: Patrick Murray, the director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, has put together a couple of proposed legislative maps, one that he calls a “constitutional” map, the other, a “competitive” map.

• Virginia: This seems like a pretty good deal, if you ask me:

Senate Majority Leader Richard “Dick” Saslaw said on a Northern Virginia radio show the other day that he had reached a “gentleman’s agreement” with Republican leaders in the House on how to go about redistricting the state….

“I’m not gonna interfere with the lines the House draws for the House,” he said. “And they’re not gonna interfere with the lines I draw for the Senate.”

Dems hold the Senate, and the GOP holds the House and the governor’s mansion, so I’ll take it.

• Wisconsin: Aaron Blake has another good entry in his redistricting series, though the bottom line is that even though Republicans control the process, they don’t have a great deal of ability to improve life for themselves. One thought that I had: If the recall effort in the WI Senate is successful, then Dems could suddenly give themselves a seat at the redistricting table where they had none before. Verrry interesting.

There has evidently been some discussion of drawing a minority-majority district in Arkansas to give the Democrats a buffer against an 0-4 Republican sweep.

My criteria for making this map was:

1. There must be a minority-majority district, no matter how hideous.

2. Rep. Ross must have a district he could potentially retain.

3. Rep. Griffin cannot be allowed to have a safe district to himself.

I’m not going to go district-by-district, mostly because I’m already up past my bedtime. But we have an open seat here, and it’s something new and blue. It’s also 49% white, 44% black, and although it goes up to majority-white when you VAP it, most Democratic primary voters will probably be black, and it’s diverse enough to be a solid Democratic district.

As for Ross and Griffin, they get to square off over my hideous reincarnation of AR-04, which includes a hefty portion of Pulaski County and has a PVI probably not too far off the current R+7 version. But I’m just eyeballing it, and I’ve never even been to Arkansas, so someone should correct me if I’m wrong.

Rep. Womack gets to sit pretty in AR-03, and Rep. Crawford should be quite comfortable in AR-02, a.k.a. the Jolly Green Giant.

In my research on South Carolina’s 2010 gubernatorial election, I came upon a fascinating chart. The chart describes the number of Democrats and Republican in South Carolina’s State House of Representatives from the Civil War to the present day. The data offers a fascinating story of the Democratic Party in South Carolina, and the Deep South in general.

Here is the story:

Most individuals familiar with politics know the history of the Deep South: it seceded from the Union after President Abraham Lincoln was elected. In the resulting Civil War, it fought the hardest and suffered the most against Union forces.

Victorious Union forces were identified with the hated Republican Party, founded with the explicit goal of destroying the southern way of life by ending slavery.

Under military Union rule, the Republican Party flourished in South Carolina:

The Republican Party was the dominant political force during the Reconstruction era, as the graph above shows. During its reign in power, it enjoyed large majorities in the State House of Representatives. Its political base was the black vote, and it attempted to systemically ensure racial equality for blacks and whites. A number of blacks were elected to state and federal office; it’s probable that many of the Republicans in the State House of Representatives were black.

This enraged whites in South Carolina. When President Rutherford Hayes ended Reconstruction and withdrew federal troops, they quickly gained control of South Carolina politics. The black vote was systemically crushed, and along with it the Republican Party.

This is reflected in the graph above. In 1874 there were 91 Republicans in the State House of Representatives. By 1878 there were only three left.

This led to the next stage of South Carolina politics, the Solid South:

Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not have data after 1880 and before 1902. After 1902, however, Democrats enjoyed literally absolute control of the State House of Representatives. For more than half-a-century, not a single Republican in South Carolina was elected to the State House of Representatives. Democrats regularly won over 95% of the popular vote in presidential elections.

That’s a record on par with that of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union.

There are several reasons why this occurred. Democrats in South Carolina were strongest of all the Deep South states, because blacks were the majority of the population. Only Mississippi at the time also had a black-majority population.

This meant that in free and fair elections, blacks would actually have control of South Carolina politics. If a free and fair election took place in another Southern states, the Democratic Party would still probably have maintained power – since whites were a majority of the population. In fact, this is what happens in the South today, except that the roles of the two parties are switched.

This was not the case with South Carolina, and party elites were profoundly aware and afraid of this. Therefore the grip of the Democratic Party was tightest in South Carolina, of all the Solid South (South Carolina was the first state to secede from the Union for the same reason). Other Solid South states had more than zero Republicans in the state legislature. Republican presidential candidates might gain 20-40% of the vote, rather than less than 5%.

In black-majority South Carolina, the Republican Party was a far greater potential threat – and so the Democratic Party was extraordinarily judicious in repressing it.

Racism was a useful tool for South Carolina Democrats, and they were very proud racists. Controversial South Carolina Governor and Senator Benjamin Tillman, for instance, once stated that:

I have three daughters, but, so help me God, I had rather find either one of them killed by a tiger or a bear and gather up her bones and bury them, conscious that she had died in the purity of her maidenhood by a black fiend. The wild beast would only obey the instinct of nature, and we would hunt him down and kill him just as soon as possible.

Another time he commented:

Great God, that this proud government, the richest, most powerful on the  globe, should have been brought to so low a pass that a London Jew  should have been appointed its receiver to have charge of the treasury.

This was the Democratic Party of South Carolina during the Solid South.

At the end of the graph, notice that there is a little dip, just after the year 1962. This was in 1964, when the first Republican in more than half-a-century was elected to the South Carolina State House of Representatives.

He was not the last:

The year 1964 marked the day that Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act, against enormous Southern Democratic opposition.

It also marked the beginning of the end of the South Carolina Democratic Party. The Democratic Party underwent a monumental shift, from a party of white elites to a party representing black interests. In the process South Carolina whites steadily began abandoning it.

At first the decline was gradual, as the graph shows. In 1980 there were 110 Democrats in the State House of Representatives and 14 Republicans. Throughout the 80s the Democratic majority steadily declined, but in 1992 there were still 84 Democrats to 40 Republicans.

Then came 1994 and the Gingrich Revolution. The seemingly large Democratic majority collapsed like the house-of-cards it was, as South Carolina whites finally started voting for Republican statewide candidates, decades after they started doing so for Republican presidential candidates. Republicans have retained control of the state chamber ever since.

Since then the Democratic Party has declined further in the State House of Representatives. As of 2010 the number of Democratic representatives is at a 134-year low. And the floor may not have been reached. There are still probably some conservative whites who vote Democratic statewide, when their political philosophy has far more in common with the Republican Party.

Nevertheless, the modern era in South Carolina politics is still shorter than the Solid South era. Here is the entire history of the State House of Representatives:

It’s a fascinating graph, and it tells a lot about South Carolina and Deep South politics.

–Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/