Google Ads


Site Stats

Redistricting the New Jersey State Senate

by: duffman

Thu Dec 02, 2010 at 1:57 AM EST


New Jersey has 40 State Legislative districts. Each district elects 1 Senator and 2 Assemblymen. The State Legislature will be up for election in November 2011, so NJ will need to have its districts ready a year earlier than most other states. Currently the State Senate has 24 Democrats and 16 Republicans. Wikipedia has an excellent map of the State Senate makeup here. (The 14th just turned blue in a special election.) The districts are drawn by a bipartisan commission made of 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans appointed by their respective parties. Some Republicans including Governor Christie claim the current map is an unfair gerrymander favoring the Democrats. I disagree.
New Jersey has 8.7 million people (2007 estimate). Each of the 40 Senate Districts must be within 20% (43,413) of the ideal population (217,067). Municipalities can not be split unless they are more than 1/40 of the entire state's population. Only 2 cities are that big: Newark and Jersey City. The restriction on splitting municipalities makes the 20% rule necessary.
duffman :: Redistricting the New Jersey State Senate
I didn't consider incumbents' residency. I'll let them figure out which district they want to run in, and if they get drawn out of a winnable district then too bad. I didn't abuse the 20% rule to favor a political party. I tried to apply population discrepancy as fairly as possible.

The Democratic Gerrymander: 31 Democrats, 9 Republicans

1st District: Cape May Co, most of Cumberland Co. 53% Obama, +2998 people. 70% white
This is the weakest of the Democratic districts. It's impossible to make a safe Democratic district with all of Cape May Co.
2nd District: eastern Atlantic Co. 59% Obama, -1908 people. 59% white
It got smaller (and more Democratic) due to population growth in the Atlantic City area.
3rd District: Deptfords to Bridgeton 57% Obama, +5596 people. 75% white
It's a little bit sleeker and more Democratic.
4th District: interior Gloucester, Camden, Salem and Atlantic Co. 58% Obama, +6767 people. 75% white
Anchored by strongly Democratic towns such as Winslow and Monroe. The region between Camden and Atlantic City has grown enough to deserve its own district.
5th District: metro Camden 73% Obama, -3477 people. 51% white, 24% black, 21% Hispanic
6th District: Washington (Glo Co) to Evesham 59% Obama, +15839 people. 79% white
The outer townships are swingy, but the middle (Camden Co) part is strongly Democratic.
7th District: Pennsauken/Cherry Hill area 62% Obama, -254 people. 76% white
8th District: Delanco to Pemberton 67% Obama, -5403 people. 59% white, 27% black
Incumbent Republican Diane Allen lives here. This district should be too Democratic and too different for her to win.
9th District: southern Burlington and Ocean Co 42% Obama, +5336 people. 93% white
The biggest district on this map
10th District: Trenton, Hamilton, northern Burl Co 65% Obama, +2523 people. 54% white, 26% black, 16% Hispanic
Hamilton and Bordentown are Democratic at the presidential level but Republican the local level. Combining them with Trenton should stop them from causing trouble.
11th District: Toms River and western Ocean/Monmouth 42% Obama, +6048 people. 87% white
Almost all of the population is in the eastern part: Toms River and the shore towns.
12th District: Lakewood, Brick, Wall, and everything east 37% Obama, +15120 people. 84% white
Don't let the small size fool you into thinking it's urban and therefore liberal. It's the most Republican district in NJ.
13th District: Tinton Falls and everything east except Rumson 57% Obama, -5642 people. 66% white
The Democrats' best chance at winning part of Monmouth County. Frank Pallone lives here and you can appreciate why it's hard to draw him into a Democratic congressional district.
14th District: Rumson/Middletown to Howell 42% Obama, -6983 people. 86% white
Republican Monmouth County in all its teabagging glory.
15th District: Old Bridge to Freehold 49% Obama, -587 people. 74% white
The Democrats' second best chance at winning part of Monmouth County. I count it as a Republican district but maybe in a wave election it could be the Democrats' 32nd district.
16th District: Robbinsville to East Brunswick 59% Obama, +23790 people. 66% white, 19% Asian
The current 14th but pushed further north.
17th District: Lawrence to Somerville to Frenchtown 62% Obama, +1033 people. 73% white
A Democratic district anchored in Princeton reaches into Hunterdon and Somerset Counties.
18th District: New Brunswick to Bridgewater 64% Obama, +10382 people. 48% white, 16% black, 13% Asian, 21% Hispanic
19th District: Edison to Middlesex Boro 62% Obama, +14589 people. 50% white, 29% Asian
20th District: Sayreville, South Amboy, Perth Amboy, Woodbridge 60% Obama, -9702 people. 47% white, 13% Asian, 30% Hispanic
Edison and Woodbridge are huge towns that each take up most of a Senate district so that limits where these districts can go. Sayreville and South Amboy are swingy but Woodbridge and especially Perth Amboy make it a strong Democratic district.
21st District: Warren Co and most of Hunterdon Co 42% Obama, +79 people. 87% white
1 of 4 Republican districts in the north
22nd District: southern Morris Co and northern Somerset Co 43% Obama, +5683 people. 82% white
23rd District: Plainfield to Morristown 60% Obama, -827 people. 55% white, 20% black, 19% Hispanic
1 of 2 Democratic districts that reaches into Morris Co.
24th District: Carteret to Summit 60% Obama, -4165 people. 64% white, 16% black, 14% Hispanic
This is Tom Kean Jr's district and it's probably too Democratic for him to win it. This map is meant to shut Republicans out of Union County.
25th District: Elizabeth, Roselle Park, Union Twp, Kenilworth 68% Obama, -9436 people. 35% white, 17% black, 43% Hispanic
26th District: West Orange to Parsippany 54% Obama, -24058 people. 71% white, 15% Asian
This is the second weakest of the Democratic districts. I hope the Democrats have the balls to go for it. This underpopulated district is balanced out by the 16th, a similar affluent suburban district that's overpopulated.
27th District: Fairfield to Nutley 58% Obama, -10336 people. 69% white
Northern Essex county makes a clean compact district. This is the kind of district Republicans would have to win to take the State Senate under this map.
28th District: Hillside to East Orange 92% Obama, -1160 people. 70% black
Sure I could break this up and strengthen nearby suburban Democrats but that wouldn't be fair to black voters. Even though there isn't a VRA at the state level.
29th District: Newark except the East Ward 94% Obama, +9081 people. 58% black, 33% Hispanic
The East Ward is the part that's most different from the rest of Newark.
30th District: Newark's East Ward, Harrison, Kearny, northwest Jersey City 74% Obama, +7567 people. 37% white, 10% black, 15% Asian, 36% Hispanic
31st District: Bayonne, most of Jersey City, Hoboken 76% Obama, -5099 people. 43% white, 23% black, 11% Asian, 21% Hispanic
The part of New Jersey that's facing Manhattan.
32nd District: northern Hudson Co 70% Obama, -9167 people. 26% white, 66% Hispanic
This is one of the densest places in America.
33rd District: Passaic to Prospect Park 61% Obama, -21711 people. 48% white, 39% Hispanic
34th District: Paterson to Wayne 68% Obama, +15509 people. 36% white, 19% black, 40% Hispanic
The 2 lower Passaic Co districts balance each other out in population and spread Democratic strength as evenly as possible.
35th District: North Arlington to Edgewater 55% Obama, -10610 people. 61% white, 16% Asian, 20% Hispanic
36th District: Hackensack to Wyckoff 57% Obama, +4722 people. 65% white, 19% Hispanic
37th District: Teaneck to Hillsdale 55% Obama, -6373 people. 63% white, 15% Asian, 13% Hispanic
38th District: Fort Lee to Upper Saddle River 55% Obama, -19114 people. 61% white, 21% Asian, 11% Hispanic
Democratic strength is spread evenly over 4 Bergen County districts. There is an incumbent Republican in one of these districts, Gerry Cardinale, who won't go down without a fight. Sure it might be smarter to make Bergen Co 3-1, but 4-0 can be done if you accept the risk.
39th District: northern Morris and southeast Sussex 44% Obama, -436 people. 78% white
40th District: Sussex Co, upper Passaic Co, far west Bergen Co 42% Obama, +3767 people. 88% white

The Republican Gerrymander: 21 Republicans, 19 Democrats

1st District: Cape May Co, most of Cumberland Co, southern Atlantic Co. 49% Obama, -9122 people. 77% white
There is only so much you can do with a Cape May-Cumberland based district.
2nd District: Atlantic City to Millville 64% Obama, +15480 people. 49% white, 21% black, 24% Hispanic
A Democratic vote sink in southeast NJ.
3rd District: Salem Co, southern Gloucester Co 51% Obama, -11895 people. 84% white
2 Democratic districts grab Democratic pieces of Gloucester Co and this is what's left. There are a lot of 51% Obama districts in this map and Republicans will have to hold all of them in order to control the State Senate.
4th District: Glassboro to Winslow to Gloucester Twp 65% Obama, +5349 people. 72% white
A Democratic vote sink in fast growing exurban Camden.
5th District: Paulsboro to Cherry Hill 73% Obama, +1310 people. 79% white
A bowtie-shaped district in suburban Camden taking the Deptfords in the west and Cherry Hill/Voorhees in the east.
6th District: metro Camden, Pennsauken 75% Obama, -1862 people. 46% white, 26% black, 24% Hispanic
7th District: northwest Burlington Co 66% Obama, -13652 people. 65% white, 24% black
A Republican district on borrowed time. Diane Allen's district with super-Democratic Pennsauken removed and swingy Moorestown added.
8th District: mid Burlington Co 54% Obama, -5473 people, 78% white.
More Republican than the current 8th but it's also on borrowed time.
9th District: Pinelands 45% Obama, +1626 people. 86% white
Maybe the biggest possible legislative district in NJ.
10th District: Manchester and everything east 42% Obama, +3374 people. 89% white
This is the best, most compact possible Toms River district.
11th District: Brick to Neptune/Asbury Park 47% Obama, +11385 people. 81% white
The Democratic stronghold in eastern Monmouth Co gets broken up.
12th District: Ocean Twp to Middletown 48% Obama, -2331 people. 79% white
13th District: Marlboro to Lakewood 42% Obama, +20025 people. 74% white
Lakewood makes it a very Republican district.
14th District: Bordentown to Jackson 49% Obama, +1427 people. 83% white
Hamilton, Robbinsville and Bordentown get combined with Republican territory in Monmouth and Ocean Co.
15th District: mid Mercer Co 77% Obama, -1260 people. 46% white, 28% black, 16% Hispanic
The most Democratic parts of Mercer Co get packed into 1 district.
16th District: East Windsor to North Brunswick 61% Obama, +18056 people. 63% white, 19% Asian
This is the least Democratic of the Democratic districts on this map. It has some swingy territory such as Monroe and Cranbury but it's not practical to make another Republican district out of it.
17th District: Sayreville to Holmdel 50% Obama, -6665 people. 73% white
Holmdel is the Republican anchor in this district.
18th District: Franklin to Plainfield 73% Obama, -3410 people. 35% white, 29% black, 15% Asian, 19% Hispanic
It packs in Democrats so the rest of Somerset and western Union can go in Republican districts.
19th District: New Brunswick, Edison, South Plainfield 65% Obama, -5455 people. 45% white, 24% Asian, 19% Hispanic
20th District: Woodbridge, Perth Amboy, Carteret, Rahway 65% Obama, -9392 people. 42% white, 11% black, 12% Asian, 33% Hispanic
21st District: Hopewell to southern Warren Co 47% Obama, -14398 people. 87% white
It's Republican enough to absorb Hopewell.
22nd District: most of Somerset Co 48% Obama, -4927 people. 74% white
23rd District: western Union Co, eastern Somerset Co, except the Plainfields 50% Obama, -15124 people. 81% white
Tom Kean Jr's district becomes a little more Republican.
24th District: Linden, Roselle, Elizabeth, Hillside 76% Obama, +555 people. 27% white, 25% black, 43% Hispanic
Union County: the extremely Democratic 24th and barely Republican 23rd cancel each other out. Sounds fair, right?
25th District: western Essex Co, eastern Morris Co 45% Obama, +8071 people. 84% white
26th District: West Orange to Clifton 71% Obama, +24087 people. 54% white, 21% black, 16% Hispanic
This is the only white-majority Democratic district in northern NJ. Packing makes all the other Democratic districts majority-minority.
27th District: Union Twp to East Orange 85% Obama, -2308 people. 26% white, 60% black
28th District: Newark except the East Ward 94% Obama, +9081 people. 58% black, 33% Hispanic
29th District: Newark's East Ward, Harrison, Kearny, northwest Jersey City 74% Obama, +7567 people. 37% white, 10% black, 15% Asian, 36% Hispanic
30st District: Bayonne, most of Jersey City, Hoboken 76% Obama, -5099 people. 43% white, 23% black, 11% Asian, 21% Hispanic
The Newark-to-Jersey-City districts are the same in both the Democratic and Republican gerrymanders. The region is solidly Democratic so partisan gerrymandering gets done elsewhere.
31st District: Northeast Hudson Co, Edgewater, Cliffside Park 71% Obama, +7678 people. 27% white, 64% Hispanic.
This district reaches into Bergen Co instead of Secaucus to make the Republican Meadowlands district possible.
32nd District: south Bergen Co, Secaucus, Belleville, Nutley 52% Obama, -460 people. 67% white, 12% Asian, 18% Hispanic
A tough district the Republicans have to win in order to take a majority in the State Senate.
33rd District: Passaic to Ridgefield 68% Obama, -7147 people. 38% white, 43% Hispanic
34th District: Paterson, Haledon, Fair Lawn, Elmwood Park 77% Obama, +2697 people. 29% white, 21% black, 46% Hispanic
35th District: Teaneck/Englewood area 64% Obama, +3610 people. 46% white, 12% black, 24% Asian, 17% Hispanic
36th District: northern Bergen Co to Saddle Brook 47% Obama, +3657 people. 78% white
37th District: mid Passaic Co, western Bergen Co 46% Obama, -3884 people. 85% white
38th District: southern Morris Co 47% Obama, -7357 people. 72% white
39th District: northern Morris Co and upper Passaic Co 46% Obama, -4254 people. 80% white
40th District: Sussex Co, most of Warren Co 39% Obama, -9579 people. 88% white

Conclusion
It's possible to give the Democrats 19 to 31 seats. 25 is the logical compromise. I would suggest incumbent protection (24 Dems) plus the two Burlington County Republicans on borrowed time.
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Redistricting the New Jersey State Senate | 26 comments
Very interesting Map or Maps
Three points

1. As noted this bi-partisan commission is intensely partisan/political in nature.  What's the timeline for member selections?

2. Some of the posters have suggested that "Must" draw Majority/Minority seats is the intent of the VRA.  I note several districts like #35 is 46% white.  Would it be possible to draw a few more majority/minority seats?  If you started with the idea of maximizing majority/minority seats -how many seats would there be?

3. Does the Map have to be complete by June or Nov 2011?

Elections are
going to be in Nov 2011, and primaries are to be held in June.  I read that the lines need to be submitted by Feb 1, unless the census numbers are delayed.  Did anyone hear differently?
[ Parent ]
I must say
though that I disagree when you say that the current map is not a Dem Gerrymander.  I believe that it is one, or is very close to one (though not as good of one as you drew).  

In 2001, the 5 Dems on the Commission and the 5 Reps on the commission each came up with their own set of maps.  The Sup Court CJ appointed someone who simply voted for the Dem maps.  There was no effort made at compromise.  All but 1 republican literally walked out on the final vote.

[ Parent ]
The process was a Democratic gerrymander
So the process was a Democratic gerrymander, but the result is not nearly as Democratic as it could be. This time the map could be a lot more Democratic than it is now, so incumbent protection should be considered a compromise.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
I agree
But I think that a fair map would maximize the number of swing seats instead of protecting anyone.  Even in your Dem Gerrymander, I think dems would probably win 28-29 of those seats instead of 31, and in the Republican Gerrymander, I think Dems still would keep the senate.  The Seacock seat is swing at best.
[ Parent ]
swing seats
What would you consider a swing seat? National average (53% Obama) or NJ average (57% Obama). I would say NJ average, because the party that controls NJ should be the party that can win 57% Obama seats. Some Republicans can win those seats. Bill Baroni held one, Diane Allen holds an even more Democratic seat.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
I would prefer to
use the gov results, because the state elections are done in the off years, and I would define a swing district as one that went for Christie in 2009 and Corzine in 2005.  What you you prefer?
[ Parent ]
Gov results are a good idea
for the reason you said.
Let's say a 52% Obama district went 50-50 in 2005 and a 59% Obama district went 50-50 in 2009. (Of course it's not that simple, Corzine overperformed in Bergen Co both times and underperformed in the south.)
In that case the Dem map has a 13 "swing" districts and the GOP map has 2.
I think every swing district on the current map is represented by a Democrat (although Diane Allen represents a district Corzine won in 09).
I like it because it justifies the Dem map.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
maximizing majority/minority seats
Maximizing minority seats also minimizes the number of Democratic seats. The Republican map has 15 minority districts. You can make a 26th district minority by swapping some territory with the 27th (East Orange for West Orange). I'm sure 16 is the maximum.
I don't endorse maximizing the number of minority districts because it packs Democrats into fewer districts. The Democratic map has 10 minority districts.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
Based on Numbers
The Republican gerrymander seems more fair, considering it almost evenly splits the seats down the middle between D and R.
What?
Should we also gerrymander Texas, so it has equal numbers of Ds and Rs?  How about California? Utah? Massachusetts?  (Not that the latter two would be possible)  Fair would be giving the people of new Jersey an opportunity to vote for whom they prefer to represent them not manipulating the lines to achieve an artificial "balance".  

28, Unenrolled, MA-08
[ Parent ]
I don't know much about NJ
But comparing it to the map for House districts in the state, this map looks way more fair than the ones they have at the federal level, where it looks like mashed up worms were placed on a flat surface.
[ Parent ]
the 2 extremes
The Democratic extreme is 31 and the Republican extreme is 19. They should meet in the middle and agree to 25. You could even argue the Democratic map is more fair because it has more districts that are close to the state average, 57% Obama.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
The U.S. Constitution
requires that legislative seats vary in population by much less than the 20% figure you cited. Georgia legislative maps were thrown out last cycle for much less population variation.  
And the VRA explicitly applies at the state level

[ Parent ]
There may be
one man one vote issues and VRA issues with these maps.

These issues-since they are not a  preclearance state are like "the tree in the forest".  If no sues over VRA or size disparity of the districts then the issue is immaterial.  

Its almost certain that someone will sue over the state senate map in NJ.  Either the GOP or democrats will feel that they got the short end of the straw so there will be litigation so districts will need to be equal or near equal in population.  

[ Parent ]
Disparities of the size
envisioned in these plans would guarantee suit. VRA is a different question.
[ Parent ]
The traditional rule of thumb
Is 10% variance. But I recall a case from my election law class a number of years ago where a map that really, really deliberately pushed the envelope on the 10% rule was thrown out. Let me try to dig that up.
[ Parent ]
Can't find the case, but here's my outline :)
 

Karcher v. Daggett (SCOTUS, 1983)

 
  • Currently,      the leading authority is Karcher v.      Daggett
    • Two       levels of scrutiny are applied to maps: A higher one to       congressional districts, and a lower one to state & local       districts
  • The      so-called “Karcher v. Daggett      two-step” asks two questions when looking at non-equipopulous congressional      district maps:
    • 1) Could       the population differences among the districts been reduced or eliminated       through a good faith effort to draw equipopulous districts?
    • 2) If       the State did not make a good faith effort to achieve equality, can the       State prove each variance among the districts was necessary to achieve       some legitimate goal?
  • Answering      question 1: In this day and age of computers, a plaintiff can always      show that an equipopulous map could have easily been drawn in a good faith      effort
    • Prof.       Hebert’s advice to would-be defendants: Always make your       maps zero-difference
      • The        court has used tiny differences (in Vieth,        as low as 19 people) to strike down maps it didn’t like but might not        have had another legal reason to strike down
  • Answering      question 2: The state must show that each variation was directly caused by      an effort to achieve some legitimate goal
    • What       are “legitimate goals”?
      • 1)        Making districts compact (including respecting natural boundaries)
      • 2)        Respecting municipal boundaries
      • 3)        Respecting county boundaries (if counties are small enough to represent        “communities of interest” – ie, areas which share socio-economic        characteristics)
      • 4)        Respecting precinct boundaries (for ease of administering elections)
      • 5)        Avoiding contests between incumbents (incumbents hold greater power in        Congress, so protecting them is valid)
    • These       policies must be applied consistently and without discrimination, and every       discrepancy must be related to one of these policies
    • When       looking at deviations, courts weigh several factors:
      • 1)        Size of deviations
      • 2)        Importance of the state’s interest
      • 3)        Consistency with which the plan reflects those interests overall
      • 4)        Possibility that an alternative plan can satisfy those interests while        achieving population equality
 

State & Local Maps

 
  • These      maps receive a lower level of scrutiny than that outlined by Karcher
  • Requires states      to make “an honest and good faith effort” to achieve population equality
    • Even       though the language is similar, this standard is more relaxed
  • This      requirement yields a traditional rule of thumb:
    • If a       deviation is less than 10%, then no justification is generally       required
    • If a       deviation is greater than 10%, then justification is always required
  • If a      deviation is greater than 10%, then it must be justified (as above in step      two of Karcher) with consistently      applied, nondiscriminatory redistricting policies
    • However,       even if you are under 10%, a map can be invalidated if policies have been       applied discriminatorily
      • For        example, if you overpopulate white suburban districts and underpopulate        black urban districts, but do it with a total deviation under 10%, you        will run into problems
  • Courts      usually look at total deviation, which is      calculated as follows:
    • Total       deviation = (largest district - smallest district)
    • Total       deviation percentage = total deviation ÷ ideal district
    • Ideal       district = total population ÷ number of districts
  • Sometimes,      courts look at average deviation, which is calculated as follows:
    • Average       deviation = (ABS(actual district1 - ideal district) +       ABS(actual district2 - ideal district) + … + ABS(actual       districtn - ideal district)) ÷ number of districts
    • Average       deviation percentage = average deviation ÷ ideal district
 
[ Parent ]
Hmm
That looked a lot better on preview, but still reasonably readable.
[ Parent ]
Here we go
It was Larios v. Cox.
[ Parent ]
Yup
That was the Georgia legislation I was referring to. The Court of Appeals threw out the Democratic gerrymander because it found that population disparities were designed to disadvantage Republicans. Cert was denied, but Scalia dissented from denial:

When reviewing States' redistricting of their own legislative boundaries, we have been appropriately deferential. See Mahan v. Howell, 410 U.S. 315, 327 (1973). A series of our cases established the principle that "minor deviations" among districts-deviations of less than 10%-are " 'insufficient to make out a prima facie case of invidious discrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment so as to require justification by the State.' " Brown v. Thomson, 462 U.S. 835, 842 (1983) (quoting Gaffney v. Cummings, 412 U.S. 735, 745 (1973)); see also Voinovich v. Quilter, 507 U.S. 146, 160-162 (1993). This case presents a question that Brown, Gaffney, and Voinovich did not squarely confront-whether a districting plan that satisfies this 10% criterion may nevertheless be invalidated on the basis of circumstantial evidence of partisan political motivation.

   The state officials who drafted Georgia's redistricting plan believed the answer to that question was "no," reading our cases to establish a 10% "safe harbor" with which they meticulously complied. The court below disagreed. No party here contends that, beyond grand generalities in cases such as Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 577 (1964), this Court has addressed the question. The opinion below is consistent with others to have addressed the issue; there is no obvious conflict among the lower courts. This is not a petition for certiorari, however, but an appeal, and we should not summarily affirm unless it is clear that the disposition of this case is correct.

   In my view, that is not clear. A substantial case can be made that Georgia's redistricting plan did comply with the Constitution. Appellees do not contend that the population deviations-all less than 5% from the mean-were based on race or some other suspect classification. They claim only impermissible political bias-that state legislators tried to improve the electoral chances of Democrats over Republicans by underpopulating inner-city and rural districts and by selectively protecting incumbents, while ignoring "traditional" redistricting criteria. The District Court agreed. See App. to Juris. Statement 8a-25a.

   The problem with this analysis is that it assumes "politics as usual" is not itself a "traditional" redistricting criterion. In the recent decision in Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. __ (2004), all but one of the Justices agreed that it is a traditional criterion, and a constitutional one, so long as it does not go too far. See id., at __ (plurality opinion) (slip op., at 16-17); id., at __ (Kennedy, J., concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 2); id., at __ (Souter, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 2); id., at ___ (Breyer, J., dissenting) (slip op., at 1). It is not obvious to me that a legislature goes too far when it stays within the 10% disparity in population our cases allow. To say that it does is to invite allegations of political motivation whenever there is population disparity, and thus to destroy the 10% safe harbor our cases provide. Ferreting out political motives in minute population deviations seems to me more likely to encourage politically motivated litigation than to vindicate political rights.

   I would set the case for argument.


[ Parent ]
NJ doesn't allow splitting municipalities
In the dense parts of the state where every city has about 50000 people the population deviation will have to be large, because you have no choice. In the rural parts of the state where each city/town has 3000 people the population deviation can be small.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
Last cycle
the NJ Supreme Court decided otherwise.  Bartlett v. Strickland may be to the contrary, however.  
[ Parent ]
Thanks David
Do you think a court would accept these 2 cases:
1. Democratic map: 33 and 34.
I think putting 2 districts entirely in lower Passaic County is good communities-of-interest redistricting. Passaic, Clifton, and Wayne are each big cities, and any combination of them would have a substantial population deviation. However combined their average deviation is only -3000 people. Would they accept that?
2. Democratic map: 16 and 26.
Their population deviations are almost equal, but it opposite directions. Both are similar communities (white affluent suburban liberal) so you can't claim this deviation discriminates against a certain community. (Of course the real reason the 26th is small is because any additional territory around it is too Republican, but don't tell them that. The 16th is too big simply because all the townships in that area are huge and this was the best I could do.)

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
Thanks for dispelling that myth.
Truth is that if it really was a secret Dem gerrymander, we would have seats in the high 20's.  31 is the ceiling, but I doubt we win every single district.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
Redistricting the New Jersey State Senate | 26 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox