I presume you followed OR's rules that

redistricting is to be done with no regards to partisanship, right?

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

---

by: LookingOver @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 06:26:33 AM UTC

Yes I did

Although in practice, that rule is fudged sometimes (see the present drawing of OR-01, with a little nub into Multnomah County to keep Rep. Wu in the district).

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 07:10:35 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah, undoubtedly.

With humans in charge, temptations sway decisions.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

---

by: LookingOver @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 07:14:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah and

what about the totally gratuitous finger of southwest Portland in the current OR-05? I understand the area is suburban character but that was still a rather cute way to make the district a point or two more Democratic.

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.

---

by: Nico @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 21:41:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm suspicious that Oregon could have five Democratic-leaning districts without heavy gerrymandering

Now maybe you've managed to do it, I don't know, I'm not sure of the partisan data for your districts. I do know that Oregon already has two swing districts, OR-04 and OR-05, with CPVIs of D+2 and D+1 respectively.

Now maybe these districts are somewhat more inclined to vote Democratic than their PVIs suggest (as indicated by November's results) although you should tread with caution into extrapolating too much from any one Congressional race, where candidate quality and incumbency matters a lot and can be reversed at some point down the track).

Still, if your ratings are accurate, you've somehow managed to shore up three out of four Democratic incumbents and created a new Democratic-leaning district. The only way that's possible is if you've significantly packed OR-02 or unpacked OR-03, and that certainly seems like "excessive partisanship" to me. It doesn't look like you have, however, and so you're probably overestimating Democratic chances here.  

---

by: Nichlemn @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 12:12:57 PM UTC

They are more inclined to vote Democratic than their PVIs suggest

PVI doesn't really matter because so many Oregonian voters are unaffiliated and voter turnout is consistently very high.

I don't think I'm overestimating Democratic chances at all. Oregon is an extremely liberal state on the federal level, and it has been for decades. Once Republicans stopped coming in the liberal variety, Democrats took over, and they've dominated the congressional delegation ever since.

OR-02, for better or for worse, is self-packing. Geographically contiguous Eastern Oregon is ruby-red; Central Oregon, which is reddish but trending blue because of the outsize influence of Bend, is increasingly considered a distinct region, although the boundaries are somewhat disputed (I usually think of Central Oregon as Jefferson, Deschutes, and Crook counties, sometimes including Wheeler County and northern Klamath and Lake counties). You'll notice I didn't really have to unpack OR-03 at all, aside from a few West Hills precincts that identify more strongly with the Washington County suburbs anyway.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 17:25:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Liberal Republicans like Bob Packwood and Mark Hatfield?

Gordon Smith wasn't too bad, either.  He was a supporter of LGBT rights, supported closely-regulated stem cell research, and was part of the Republican Main Street Partnership (GOPers who spurned social conservatism as a political issue and had center-right views on government).  

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

---

by: LookingOver @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 20:52:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Fun fact: Tom Davis runs this partnership group.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

---

by: LookingOver @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 20:53:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Exactly

And Vic Atiyeh and Tom McCall, two of the best governors Oregon has ever had.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 21:09:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

test

PVI doesn't really matter because so many Oregonian voters are unaffiliated and voter turnout is consistently very high.

Why does this make PVI "not really matter"? PVI was calculated from Presidential elections where those same factors were in play. It does mean it's harder to swing a district through changes in turnout alone.

Central Oregon, which is reddish but trending blue

I'd like to see some evidence (not one or two elections). Esepcially just after the 2008 elections, I've seen too many states or areas within states described as "trending" Democratic solely because of Obama's performance (which might not have even been above that of the national swing).

I don't think I'm overestimating Democratic chances at all. Oregon is an extremely liberal state on the federal level, and it has been for decades. Once Republicans stopped coming in the liberal variety, Democrats took over, and they've dominated the congressional delegation ever since.

It's true that Republicans haven't controlled a majority of the delegation since 1956. They did, however, win 2/4 and 2/5 seats quite frequently. Maybe you think the Republicans have only turned rightward recently, but in that case the sample size is far too small to come up with any meaningful inference.

On the state level, Republicans have done better. They controlled the legislature a few years ago and came close to doing so this year. Thus, they probably have legislative majorities in half of your districts. Now, legislative success doesn't necessarily correlate with Congressional success, but Oregon doesn't really seem like the sort of state where this would be the case (former dominance by one party, such as in the South).  

---

by: Nichlemn @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 05:03:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

oops, i forgot to change the title, it should be "Response" or something

---

by: Nichlemn @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 05:03:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not true at all

Oregon voters tend to be far more amenable to ballot-switching between the state and federal level than some other states, more comparable to New England or New York than to, say, California. Oregon actually was dominated by the Republican Party for the first half of the century, but the eventual divergence of the Democrats and Republicans over military issues (exemplified by then-Sen. Wayne Morse, actually) got the ball rolling for the Oregon Democratic Party. When Republicans took a rightward turn after then-Sens. Packwood and Hatfield retired in quick succession (for rather different reasons), Democrats roared into near-total dominance.

As for Central Oregon, Sen. Wyden lost Deschutes County by literally 22 votes. Gordon Smith mauled him there in 1996, which was the last election in which Wyden had more than token opposition.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 06:13:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If OR were still swingy overall

Kurt Schrader would have lost. Yet he won 51-46 in a D+1 PVI district.

If Rs can't win the swingiest OR district in the most R year of '10, it's hard to see them winning any district other than Walden's in the future.

On the state legislative level Rs for the most part haven't gone full wingnut. There are still many moderate Rs here, e.g. Alvin Alley and Chris Dudley split 80% of the R primary vote.

---

by: tietack @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 07:32:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for posting this map

I appreciate your efforts on it-very interesting.  I would like to see a 5 district standpat map.  Its seems to be that Portland Metro area has grown a bit faster then the rest of the state.

Of course a 6th district would be a wild card in OR.  I am only familar with the last 5 sets of lines (1960 -2000) but it appears that Eastern Oregon (those counties that do not touch the Pacific ocean) have more or less been an intact district forever in this state.  That's a geographic/community bond that could even back 100 years?  Does anyone know?

Schrader lives in Clackmas-makes more sense to push him into Washington county/Portland area.  Then have the new seat based in Marion/Linn/Polk/Yamhill area.

Then Dafazio would pick up balance of Josephine/Jackson plus Klamath falls.

That seems more logical and nonpartisan to me.  That would perserve an Eastern Oregon seat and nice and compact.  It would create a seat with no incumbent that would be a fair fight.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 13:15:35 PM UTC

i think this could go

3 gop 3 dem in an open seat situation.  lane co. as a whole isn't as democratic as places like washington co. or benton co., it's about D+5, i think, and with low college turnout, it could be a problem

marion co. is still purple.  it's pvi is about zero., maybe D+1.  i'd make the yellow one include eugene and lose yamhill and polk.  and i don't think greg walden's a bad fit for the c. oregon one

18, Dem, CA-14 (home) CA-09 (college, next year). social libertarian, economic liberal, fiscal conservative.   Everybody should put age and CD here. :)

---

by: jncca @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 20:33:26 PM UTC

scratch that.

that would make it 3-3. i think 4-2 would be fair and safe.

18, Dem, CA-14 (home) CA-09 (college, next year). social libertarian, economic liberal, fiscal conservative.   Everybody should put age and CD here. :)

---

by: jncca @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 20:34:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The little secret

is that Oregon has had the most "non-partisan partisan" redistricting plan for the last decade.  A circuit court judge from Multnomah county picked a democratic legislative plan for his redistricting plan.

This particular plan split Multnomah county three ways-Clackmas county is split two ways-it certainly have been easy to put Multnomah is just two congressional districts.
Plus Yamhill & Polk (two GOP oriented counties) are in seperate districts. While Benton is attached to 4th instead of 5th.  The GOP areas are neatly split among the 1st 4th &5th districts while Multnomah is split into three districts.  

If I had to draw a partisan map for the democrats thats exactly how I would do it.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 20:57:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm going to have to disagree

Here's why:

1. Oregon independents tend to vote Democratic on the federal level, because it's a liberal state, and it's only getting more so. This is a case where PVI and party registration don't matter as much as they do in some other states.

2. Low college turnout doesn't exist in Oregon. Ever. Oregon has one of the highest rates of youth voter turnout in the country thanks to both the mail-in ballot system and a proud tradition of Democratic political activism on college campuses.

3. Rep. Walden might be able to win OR-06. I drew it so that he'd have a shot. As I said, he knows the terrain better. But a huge part of the district population is locked up in Clackamas County, which is the home base of both Rep. Schrader and Rick Metsger, and I'm not sure I see Walden playing well there.

4. The thing about OR-05, situated around Salem, being a supposed "swing district" is that it doesn't swing. It hasn't swung since the mid-1990s. Marion County residents may have voted for President Bush twice, but they were happy with Darlene Hooley and they're happy with Rep. Schrader. It's hard for me to see Clem running and not winning it, although it's possible a strong Republican could take it in a wave. Even still, Scott Bruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun supposedly had it locked up this year, and he lost by five points.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 21:17:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't disagree with

any of your points. Let put that in my familar terms-I agree with 100%.

Yet if I was to project how a non-partisan board would redistrict Oregon here's two things I might consider.

1. Since we have a new seat being drawn and not being lost let's preserve our current five seats as much as possible. Placing two incumbents in the same seat has been avoided by non-partisan boards in NJ-WA-AZ and one suppose in OR that would be the case.  Now Iowa does that but they also avoid splitting counties sometimes that really hard to do in OR-okay impossible to do in OR.

2. Because of somewhat stagnant or slower growth in OR you keep all the counties East of Portand-East of Salem-East of Eugene intact in one congressional seat as they have been for what seems like forever.  Talk about your community of interest.  

I frankly don't know the chances of OR getting a sixth seat.  Unless they do I look for a standpat type of protect all incumbents in OR.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 21:39:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oregon doesn't actually have nonpartisan redistricting per se...

The secretary of state has outsize influence in the redistricting process, and it's a partisan office. Secy. Kate Brown, a staunchly liberal Democrat, is the incumbent. Gov.-elect Kitzhaber and the State House will probably let her do whatever she wants as long as it doesn't flagrantly violate the law.

If Oregon gains a sixth district, it will be because growth is not stagnant, and the Bend-Prineville-Redmond area (Deschutes, Crook, and Jefferson counties) is among the fastest growing areas in the state. I predict there will be bipartisan support for giving Central Oregon more of a say on the federal level, because it's a swing district that Democrats see trending their way and Republicans see as fertile ground for getting a second conservative in the delegation.

I'll put my opinion of Oregon's odds of getting an extra district this way: I won't be surprised either way on 21 December. Growth slowed down a bit last year, but I'm a bit curious about what effect the Prop 8 passage and S.B. 1070 in California and Arizona respectively had on inter-West migration. (Yes, Oregon also constitutionally prohibits same-sex marriage since 2004, but its major metros are seen as very gay-friendly and same-sex civil unions are virtually equivalent to marriage under state law.) Oregon only needs a gain of just over 22,000 above projected growth to get that sixth seat.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 21:51:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Clackamas Co isn't as D as it may seem

There's a substantial wingnut element there, it was perhaps the key in the anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment back in '04.

Strangely enough, some of their leaders have been making noises in favor of immigration reform.

---

by: tietack @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 02:31:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's trending blue, though...

Rep. Schrader actually carried Lake Oswego this year, as did Gov.-elect Kitzhaber...even though Dudley lives there.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 05:03:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Fake Oswego is a different animal

(with West Linn) -- a islet of ritzy suburbs in a county of working class.

Nevertheless, Ds have had some success in the county, more in a working class environmentally conscious wingnut friendly immigrant open Tonya Harding way.  

---

by: tietack @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 07:22:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I am still a little confused on how Oregon

does redistricting.  I think there is a difference between state legislative districts and congressional.  We see quite a few states like TX OH MO where one system is used for legislative seats and another for congressional seats.

I am doing this from memory so if I am wrong the states that are above-excuse me.

Is there anyone more clued in on Oregon?

Something tells me that you are absolutely correct that the Secretary of State has a huge impact on legislative seats but that the legislators do the congressional seats.  Could be wrong-could be confused.

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 22:15:54 PM UTC

Here are the basic rules...

http://www.leg.state.or.us/red...

I believe the legislature (and Democrats hold the trifecta in Salem despite sloughing off a few state senators in marginal districts last month) gets first right to draw the map, and if the governor vetoes it or wants further review (I may be wrong about that one), the secretary of state gets to draw the map. I believe that's what happened in the 2002 redistricting.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

---

by: SaoMagnifico @ Wed Dec 15, 2010 at 22:31:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Response #2

Oregon voters tend to be far more amenable to ballot-switching between the state and federal level than some other states, more comparable to New England or New York than to, say, California.

Oregon is the most polarised state in the country, with most liberal Kerry voters and the most conservative Bush voters. This helps your case one way by suggesting that moderately Democratic districts at the Presidential level are less likely to go GOP than their PVIs would indicate. On the other hand, it hurts your case that moderates would help Democrats win districts with nominally evenish PVIs.

Oregon actually was dominated by the Republican Party for the first half of the century, but the eventual divergence of the Democrats and Republicans over military issues (exemplified by then-Sen. Wayne Morse, actually) got the ball rolling for the Oregon Democratic Party. When Republicans took a rightward turn after then-Sens. Packwood and Hatfield retired in quick succession (for rather different reasons), Democrats roared into near-total dominance.

That doesn't come to close to the sorts of dominance that Southern Democrats had. State like Alabama had literally 100% Democratic representation until the 1960s, and only just lost their legislative majorities in 2010. Those states having "vestigial" legislators makes sense, a state which lost its Republican dominance at any level more than 50 years ago does not.

As for Central Oregon, Sen. Wyden lost Deschutes County by literally 22 votes. Gordon Smith mauled him there in 1996, which was the last election in which Wyden had more than token opposition.

Which means this isn't helpful for finding which way a county is "trending", any more than claiming Olympia Snowe's recent results in a given county in Maine "proves" that the county is trending Republican.  

Kurt Schrader would have lost. Yet he won 51-46 in a D+1 PVI district.

If Rs can't win the swingiest OR district in the most R year of '10, it's hard to see them winning any district other than Walden's in the future.

This is reminiscent of the excessive extrapolations of Mark Critz's special election victory in PA-12. Sure, that district had a significant Democratic registration advantage, but other vestigially Democratic districts (e.g. in Arkansas and West Virginia) fell to the Republicans. The main lesson is that there a lot of variables (e.g. candidate quality) in a single race and so it is best to look at other data to get a better idea of a district's competitiveness.

And what does that data say? Well, OR-05 is not adverse to voting for national Republicans, as evidenced by voting (narrowly) for Bush twice. Nor is it adverse to voting for state-level Republicans, presumably voting for Dudley (given he lost narrowly, he almost certainly won a district four points more Republican than the state as a whole) and likely Republicans at the state legislative level given the narrow Democratic advantage there.

So, we have the strange phenomenon that Oregonians apparently don't mind state Republicans or federal (i.e. Presidential) Republicans, but are very averse to federal Republicans elected from the state. The evidence for this comes from one Congressional race.      

---

by: Nichlemn @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 08:35:18 AM UTC

Arguments based on a small sample size

With five districts, and one (maybe two) that are swingy, the sample size of data that can be used to measure trends in this state overall is small.

So it's easy to dismiss the result from that one swing district.

However, I stand by my analysis (and I think you partially agree). If Rs can't do better than 46% in the one wingnut-friendly OR House district, the trends are against them.

As you'll see in my other comments to this diary, I've also noted that on a state level, Oregon Rs are more moderate -- as witnessed by the about 80% who voted for Dudley and Alley in the R Gov primary.

(aka Dudley ran as something of a centrist, while Bruun ran as a somewhat generic R. Open question -- could Dudley have beaten Wu? I think it certainly would have been closer.)

---

by: tietack @ Thu Dec 16, 2010 at 15:12:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]