What a interesting Map

and the new thought for me is that plunge by CD16 into city of Chester.  That's a new move to me.  I have not thought of it.  That's a nifty and yet Bold move. Pitts will have a cow if that was done but its a nifty move.  

Here's my 50 cents on PA.  The clue came from recent comments from Pitts and he made clear he thought the 2001 plan was too aggressive and in fact the democratic pickups of 2006 & 2008 were related to being over reaching.  So in PA in fact I believe we will see some caution from the GOP.

Here's what my crystal says and really there are only two major points in PA redistricting.

1. Eliminate Holden's seat or stack and pack democrats into it.

2. What do with PA4 & PA12.  Do you merge them or do you eliminate one and make the other more republican.

My Crystal ball says that Holden survives and either makes a plunge into Scranton & Lehigh valley area or does Lehigh valley area and a Montco move. Think right angle or boomorang shaped district.  Okay since they let Holden survive the GOP will be a bit more aggressive out West.  

Altimire's home area near Pittsburg is folded into PA14. Cambria & johnston either goes to PA5. PA4 slides through Butler county and picks up more of Westmoreland county. PA18 loses a bit more of Allegany to PA14 and picks up Western part of PA12.  Then PA9 rolls into the southern part of PA12. We have several maps here cover the SW scenerios for PA.

I think the GOP concedes 5 seats and makes substantial progress in locking up the other seats.   PA4 loses its part of Mercer county and maybe 1/2 Lawrence.  PA3 picks up more Venago and Warren county.  

I don't see 14-4.  Pitts has suggested a little more caution.  If the GOP keeps all of its 2010 gains and has a real shot at PA4 then they have moved the ball enough in PA.

 

---

by: rdelbov @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 19:45:16 PM UTC

Will be posting my own map next week....

It's pretty similar in some areas, but overall it's a 13-5 map.  Signs are the Republicans aren't going to be as aggressive this time as 2000.  I'll post the map next week when I get diary rights.

I think Holden is essentially untouchable until retirement.  Hell, the new 11th, which you have him in, is more Democratic than his existing seat by a good deal (and has more of his pre 2000 district, IIRC).  I messed around with eliminating him, but ultimately you need a vote sink for some Democratic votes in Redding, the Lehigh valley, or the Wyoming valley.  I decided to give him Redding, the Poconos, Easton, and Bethlehem, which helped shore up PA-15 a lot.  Similar to you, I split up Scranton and Wilkes-Barre however.  This gave him a district which was around D+4 - not as good as it could have been if he had the Wyoming valley, but there was no way to do this without giving Lou Barletta a base.  

I also think your PA-8 and PA-15 are still a little too Democratic for comfort.  

Still, putting Altmire and Murphey in the same district is pretty genius.  I'm pretty sure the new PA-4 is more Democratic than the old PA-19 however, so I don't think it's a lock for Murphey

---

by: eschaton @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 21:07:34 PM UTC

I meant...

Without denying Lou Barletta a base.  Given he's in Hazleton, There's no way to give him a base along with keeping PA-15 somewhat intact if you try to sink the Wyoming vally voters.  

I think the GOP will ultimately settle for +1R, -2D.  

---

by: eschaton @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 21:10:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I have maps here

with a plunge into Montco for Holden and that has some points for the GOP.  I think, however, if Holden grabs the most democratic parts of his home county plus the most democratic parts of Berks (Reading area ) an Allentown plunge might be enough.  I am not sure if there would still be enough excess population in PA17 for a Scranton finger. Not sure.  I too leaned towards a chopping up of Holden's seat and finally decided it was not worth it.

13-5 if you can grab Altmire is probably a good enough GOP goal.  I look forward to your map.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 21:34:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The problem is...

Charlie Dent comes from Allentown, so you can't really cut it out of PA-15.  

Also, the most logical place for PA-15 to grow is into Redding county.  The more Republican parts of upper Bucks and Mongomery are needed by PA-8.  And the Poconos are deep blue, and the Republican areas to the NW are largely needed for Lou Barletta.  

Thus what I did was wrap PA 17 north to take in the Poconos, and then down along the Delaware river to take in Easton and Bethlehem.  Then I took a southern fringe along the Lehigh in order to swoop into Redding.  

---

by: eschaton @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:45:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

One thing that's for sure

is the Lehigh Valley won't be gerrymandered

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26

---

by: TheGradyDem @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 21:54:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How come?

Is that some sort of unwritten rule of PA redistricting? Because while Dent is safely entrenched, it seems like taking the bluest parts of Allentown/Beth/Easton and putting them into a Dem vote sink would be a big help for the Rs whenever PA-15 comes open.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 22:21:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

PA is actually

the home of several unwritten rules.  

1. I have not seen maps  prior to 1960 for PA but Lehigh and Northampton counties have been attached to eachother at least since 1960.  In the 1960's PA8(Bucks county's seat) had a small part of Lehigh county.  So Lehigh county has been split before but not since 1970.

2. York and Lancaster county side by side countiesapparently have never been attached to eachother.  I can't find a congressional map where they have been split or attached.  Lancaster and York county have always-for as far as I can tell-have dominated their own congressional seats.  

3. I could be looking at maps wrong but I don't see where for the 60 or so years that Bucks county has been split.  Yes the southern part is more liberal and its been tempting to attach to Philly but its been intact as far as I can tell.  

4. Is there the Joe Paterno line in Southern Centre county.  There has been some mighty strange maps in PA all these years but Centre county has never been attached to the counties south of it.  Its an unwritten rule that Centre county is on  the southern border of whatever congressional seat that its been in.

So there are some unwritten rules for redistricting but I guess rules are meant to be broken.  In 2001 Lackawanna county was split and its not been before that I can tell.  So my money is on a Lehigh county split.  You can't really improve Dent's position without splitting it.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 22:42:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dummymander

I'd say this is a dummymander.  Yes it does make some of the swing seats a bit more Republican but there are still 5 districts that are over 50% Obama and in a Dem wave election I suspect many of them would be won by Dems.  It might be better if the GOP went 13-5.

---

by: TXMichael @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 21:08:02 PM UTC

I agree to a degree...

But you have to remember a 51%-48% Obama district is still R+3, which is swingy, but should still be Republican favored overall.  

PA-15 is pretty sure to fall to the Democrats within the decade though, what with the growing Latino population in the region.  

---

by: eschaton @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 21:26:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I thought 51% Obama was R+2

Obama got 53% nationally, so wouldn't a 51% Obama district be R+2?

---

by: TXMichael @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 03:02:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's the spread that matters, not the number.

Nationally, Obama won by about 53% to 46%, which was a 6% margin (6.2% to be exact).  

A district which Obama won by only 3%, therefore, would have a PVI of R+3

Of course, you also need to take Kerry votes into account, but there is no way to do this in Dave's Redistricting App.  

---

by: eschaton @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 03:40:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

huh ok

I think i've been doing PVI wrong :/

---

by: TXMichael @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 03:44:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think TXMichael is right here

I'm pretty sure your calculation gives 2x the PVI. Look at the districts with High PVIs to sort it out. NY-15, for example, is D+41 and was 93-6 Obama (spread of 87). So if it was going by spread its PVI would be D+83. Going by (Obama %-Obama national average) it would be D+40, which checks out.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 03:46:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed

It's not the spread. Here's the wikipedia article for reference.

The idea is to be able to say at a glance how much more Republican or more Democratic than the nation at large a jurisdiction is. R+2 means that a district voted 2 percentage points more Republican over the last two presidential elections than the nation at large. (Which come to think of it, is another correction to calculation -- it's the last two elections, not just the most recent.)

30, male, MI-11 (previously VA-08). Evangelical, postconservative, green.

---

by: borodino21 @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 03:56:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I stand corrected.

And I'm glad I was corrected before I posted my map.  

Still, I think my major point remains - Obama won 2008 by a historically wide margin for a Democrat.  Therefore, in order to make a safe Republican seat, you don't need to ensure a McCain district.  51%-48% is probably fine for holding PA seats for the Republicans, be it R+2 or R+3.  

---

by: eschaton @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 04:15:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I strongly disagree

R+2 or 3 is definitely not safe, that could easily fall in a wave. I'd say a safe R district needs 52% McCain at the very very very bare minimum, possibly more in Western PA which votes Republican for President but is still somewhat Democratic downballot (for instance, Jason Altmire holds an R+6 district).

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/

---

by: sapelcovits @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 04:26:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed

The limits of safety IMHO are R+6 and D+3. For some reason Dems are a little better at flipping +4, +5, and +6 districts than Republicans, but once you get to R+7 they're pretty unassailable without some sort of major assistance (i.e. a scandal)

Look at '06 and '08. Combined I count only 8 R+7 or greater seats that were flipped from R to D in those two big wave years.

ID-1 R+18
AL-2 R+16
MS-1 R+14**
TX-22 R+13*
LA-6 R+10**
KS-2 R+9
IN-8 R+8
OH-18 R+7*

*- scandal baby
**-special election

So in two huge wave years Democrats picked up 8 R+7 or greater seats nationwide, 2 of them with the aid of scandals and 2 more through special elections, which always have odd dynamics. 3 of the other 4 were due to exceptionally weak Republican candidates, with AL-2 being due to an exceptionally strong Democrat. And all 8 are back in R hands now.

On the other side of the aisle, only one D+4 or greater seats flipped to R this cycle: PA-11, which is D+4 and getting redder.

Republicans now hold 3 D+4 or greater seats.
PA-11 D+4
PA-6 D+4
IL-10 D+6

And Democrats now hold 4 R+7 or greater seats.
AR-4 R+7
KY-9 R+9
OK-2 R+14
UT-2 R+15

So in conclusions, when drawing the districts, you can pretty much assume that R+7 (with no Dem incumbent present) and D+4 (with no R incumbent present) will be safe in about 99% of all cases.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 15:38:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One Disagreement

I'd say you can actually be a little more lax in Western PA. R+6 is at the very edge of the swingy column (see my other reply), but Western PA has been getting more Republican for the last 30 years, and I see no reason why that trend would not continue. Thus, I think anything more than about R+5 west of the Susquehanna (provided Altmire can't run there) is probably safe. It's another story in SE PA though. There a R+5 district now is liable to be an EVEN district by the end of the decade, given the Dem trend in the Philly suburbs.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 15:59:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Cook PVI is calculated

out of the two-party share of the vote. That breakdown was 53.7 to 46.3, which is generally rounded to 54 - 46.

30, male, MI-11 (previously VA-08). Evangelical, postconservative, green.

---

by: borodino21 @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 03:52:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You've done a great job here, but

in the end this would be a dummymander for the GOP. If Tim Holden could beat George Gekas he can beat Lou Barletta. And Tom Marino is put in a pretty precarious position here. You've maximized Republican fortunes in the Philadelphia area, but there are too many risks here - not just for Marino and Barletta, but for Tim Murphy out west. Since the election, I've always thought the following would happen in Pennsylvania:

- Schwartz's seat becomes a Dem vote sink and the Philly Republicans (Gerlach, Meehan, Fitzpatrick) are shored up, just as you showed, but
- Holden is given a much more Democratic seat, grabbing liberal pockets from the 11th and 6th (as I said, they thought they'd gotten him in 2002 and he's still here, while Barletta will need some padding)
- eliminate Critz's seat, giving Tim Murphy the GOP areas and splitting the Dem areas between Mike Doyle and Bill Shuster

Critz will be the Western PA casualty, not Altmire, because Altmire has already proven himself three times in tough races. They could have eliminated Murtha's seat in 2002, and without his seniority, there is now no reason to keep it.

20 years old, male, GA-12 (home), GA-10 (school); previously lived in CA-29, CA-28, CA-23, IL-06, IL-14, GA-01.

---

by: Nathaniel90 @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 22:03:49 PM UTC

I think Altmire can be eliminated pretty easily.

Just split his district up so that more-or-less equal portions wind up in 3, 18, 14, and a new 4. Make the new 4th a Westmoreland county district that stretches north to New Kensington and south to Uniontown - that's about R+9, only about 25% Altmire's district, and tailor made for someone like Kim Ward. Then to make everything else secure, move about 1/3 of Erie Co. into the 5th and State College into the 9th.

What you wind up with is:
3rd - Shifts south and loses its northeast portion along with 1/3 of Erie. R+8 or so.
4th- Moves to the E side of Pittsburgh. R+9 seat that Altmire really can't win.
5th- Slides West into Erie, but loses State College. Still R+9.
9th- Picks up SC and Johnstown. Significantly less R than before, but R+12 or so is probably still way too much of an uphill fight for Critz to beat Shuster.
12th- Eliminated between the 9th, 18th, and new 4th.
14th- More or less the same. D+15.
18th- Loses its eastern third and takes in most of the Mon Valley. A little more Dem at R+6, but SW PA is getting redder and Murphy should be safe unless he faces an exceptionally strong challenge in 2012.

I've got a good map for this, I'll post it once I figure out how to compose a diary.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 22:32:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I just...

Have his district contain almost nothing but the existing north hills of Allegheny, plus Westmoreland.  Works pretty well.  

---

by: eschaton @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 01:04:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hmm..

I do much better than you (in GOP terms) for areas outside the Philly corner, but not nearly as well in the Philly burbs. What that tells me is that the actual map will be worst than either of ours.

Mine's still a work in progress, especially in light of yours. I need to strengthen the Southeast PA GOPers more.

I would humbly suggest that your lines aren't nearly ugly enough outside the Philly area. Republican legislators in Pennsylvania are not known for their cartographic restraint...

---

by: roguemapper @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 22:18:32 PM UTC

Lack of packing districts

That's the main reason.  I you give Holden a safe seat, which is probably a better plan than targeting him, then you can make a very ugly safe Dem seat in the Northeast.  If you don't you're just robbing Peter to pay Paul, so the lines might was well be fairly straight.

28, Unenrolled, MA-08

---

by: Marcus @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 22:30:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Holden

lives in a very bad place; he's in the middle of a pretty solidly R (and getting more so) territory. What's more, he's precisely equidistant from 4 Dem pockets in Wilkes-Barre/Scranton, the LV, Reading, and Harrisburg, so there's no obvious Dem vote sink he should be thrown in. If you try to draw him in with any of those pockets you wind up lowering the efficiency of your Dem sink drastically and making other R districts (particularly south of I-78) needlessly vulnerable.

What I think is going to happen is that Holden's district is eliminated and a new Open Dem seat (combining some or all of those 4 Dem areas I mentioned above) will be created in its place. Holden can move there and get a safe seat if he wins the primary. But I think Schuylkill county and the surrounding areas will be split amongst a lot of districts to make sure Holden doesn't have enough of a base in any of them to wrestle away a conservative seat.  

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 22:53:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's easy

to construct a new heavily Democratic (65%+) seat by combining the most Democratic parts of the Wyoming and Lehigh valleys with the Poconos.  The problem is you'd still end up with a PA-15 and a PA-17 which are about as Republican (maybe a bit less) as Tim Holden's current seat. And both would probably contain significant amounts of his old voters.  While Dent would be representing a mostly new district, and Barletta would also, but also be a freshmen.  

So what happens if Tim Holden again decides to embark on the tougher fight instead of moving, and wins, and the Republicans give the Democrats a free gimmie?  

---

by: eschaton @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 01:02:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think that can be averted

by really shattering Holden's district. Split Schuylkill between the 15th (central) , 11th (north) , and 6th (south). Put Lebanon into the 6th and 16th, Northern Berks into the 6th, Northern Dauphin into the 10th and 15th, Eastern Dauphin into the 16th, and split Harrisburg between the 10th and 12th. Then you'd be hard-pressed to find more than 100K Holden constituents in any of those districts, and they would all be at least R+6,  with R incumbents and primarily (to the tune of 80%) based in territory Holden hasn't represented before. I agree it's kind of risky, but I think it's eminently doable and results in safer districts in the Southeast (where the real long-term problem for Republicans is, as that area is home to 5 incumbents, already swingy, and getting more D-friendly.)

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 01:14:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Substitute 19 for 12 Above

I was operating under the assumption Platts will get Critz's number.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 01:15:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hmm, I wonder if Republicans could strike a deal by financially supporting him in a primary in the new district

---

by: Nichlemn @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 13:33:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That probably wouldn't work

What would be a good incentive for Holden to move is to put all of Reading into the Dem vote sink. I think Holden represented all of the city in the 90s, so he's liable to still have some residual goodwill there that can form a dencent base for a primary against John Callahan and/or Cory O'Brien. Holden can probably win a multi-candidate primary just by running up a large margin in Reading, and would have a solid shot at a 2-candidate primary if he could win over some conservative Dems in the Lehigh and Wyoming Valleys.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 16:08:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Pittsburgh Area

OK, what do you think of the Pittsburgh area map below.

The Critz seat is gone. Murphy & Altmire are not thrown together. This is how the districts break down:

PA-14 (Doyle), 69%O/30%M

PA-04 (Altmire), 42%O/57%M

PA-09 (Shuster/Critz), 41%O/58%M

PA-18 (Murphy), 45%O/54%M

Note: The PA-18 seat has touchpoint contiguity at a couple of locations.

---

by: roguemapper @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 23:03:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That is among the

ugliest gerrymandered sections of a state that I have ever seen.  That's up there with parts of the PA current map or Maryland's current map or Palm Beach/Broward counties portion of the current map.  

I never in my wildest dreams thought about connecting Beaver falls and Downtown Pittsburg.  

Thanks for posting this little segment.  

I would be shocked to this occur but I guess nothing should surprise me in redistricting.  

I guess if I had to suggest anything it would be to do away with the Southern move of PA14.  Maybe smoothing out the lines down south between PA9 & PA18.

I think PA17 will end up looking sorta nasty so why not PA14?  

---

by: rdelbov @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 23:32:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If done right..

..there should be a spot at the juncture of Fayette, Washington, and Westmoreland counties where you could drive a golfball across three congressional districts. Sadly, Dave's app won't let me modify voting blocks.

---

by: roguemapper @ Sat Jan 08, 2011 at 23:47:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think

LaTrobe PA is up in Northern Westmoreland county.  If that spot with the three counties Arnold Palmer could drive that golf ball.

I can fully accept drawing lines for political benefit but the lines for the last few years have set up new standards.  Mind you in the 1960's & 1970's CA has the famous barball district allow the coast in LA county.  

I am making peace with the Beaver Falls move just as I see a right triangle CD17.

---

by: rdelbov @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:23:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

That is grotesque, lol

I haven't worked on PA in awhile, but it might be good to try and average out Murphy & Shuster's districts to 56/43, especially if it cleans up the lines.

20, Ind, Fl-13 & Fl-6 (college)

---

by: MikeFL @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:01:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is what I did for the SW

---

by: andgarden @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:24:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I guess I should give the rest:

NEPA:

Philly:

Central PA:

More of the west:

And a look at the whole state:

The Republicans give Barletta the boot here.  

---

by: andgarden @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:35:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oops

That last one of the whole state is just wrong! Sorry.

---

by: andgarden @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:37:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's a thing of beauty!

What are the Obama/McCain figures for the PA-03 Erie based district on your map?

---

by: roguemapper @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:42:08 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's the whole breakdown:

(District: Obama/McCain)

Eire/NW district: 49/49

New 4th (Fayette to Butler): 41/58

New 18th: 45/54

New 14th (Pgh, etc.) 71/28

New 1st (blue, SW): 42/57

New 12th (Centre County, Cambria, "The T"): 46/53

New 9th: 38/61

New 10th: 42/56

New 11th (Scranton, etc.): 59/40

New 17th (York, Harrisburg): 47/52

New 16 (Lancaster): 47/52

New 6th (Berks, Chester, Montco): 53/46

New 7th: 52/47

New 15th: 56/43

New 8th: 52/47

New 13th: 64/35

New 2nd: 89/10

New 5th (Bob Brady's district): 88/12

---

by: andgarden @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:55:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's the relevant whole state map,

ignore the one above:

---

by: andgarden @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:59:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

stunning maps

surely we will see a little smoother lines from the GOP.

---

by: rdelbov @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 00:51:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

A bit too aggressive...

Southwestern PA has been becoming more Republican for the last 20 years, and we should assume the trend will continue.  Thus, I don't think there will really be a huge desire to push PA-14 that far down the mon or up into Beaver county.  

Admittedly, I was probably not aggressive enough Southwestern PA.  My new PA-12 combines all of Washington, Fayette, and Greene with Beaver south of the Ohio and the PA-18's share of Allegheny.  It's slightly more Republican than Critz's existing district, but significantly less than the old PA-18.  My thought was that Tim Murphy has always had fairly robust election margins, and his voters in Westmoreland were better placed putting Altmire out of commission instead.  

---

by: eschaton @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 01:47:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I tend to agree

with on SW PA.  I think just minor adjustments are needed.  The Beaver Falls move might just be overkill.

Start with PA3 and work downwards.  Keep it more or less the as its a pretty strong GOP district.  Ditch its part of Warren and add the balance of Mercer now in PA4. Take in the balance of Armstrong plus 1/3 or so of Lawrence.  That just be enough to equal the population out and will move PA3 a tad to the GOP side.  Altmire did well in Mercer and Lawrence even as Toomey won it.

With PA4 I would give Altmire's home area in Allegany county to PA14. McCandless township is due north of current PA14 boundary give or take a precinct or two.  I would then move PA4 into Northern Westmoreland county.  

PA18 gives up a few democratic leaning precincts that are next to PA14 to get that district up to snuff.  PA18 then grabs the part of PA12 in Washington county plus Greene county. There is some area swapping with PA4 in Westmoreland with PA18 plus PA9 takes in rest of Somerset plus most of Fayette county.  

That stuff can be sorted out.  

I think there are enough GOP votes around with the Beaver falls grab.  Just IMO

---

by: rdelbov @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 03:30:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't quite get it

Why shy away from the idea that the Pennsylvania legislature will draw a brutal gerrymander? These are a couple of the current districts that the PA Republicans drew in 2001. Granted, not all of them worked out as planned, but if I were a PA GOPer the lesson I'd take from that is that we didn't gerrymander enough, not that we gerrymandered too much...

---

by: roguemapper @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 04:08:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Two reasons.

1.  Some Republican in the state house said regarding PA-12 "that's not the sort of district we want to draw this time."

2.  The amount of Republicans in the area has declined enough to not requite a purposeful vote sink for rural Democratic voters in Western Pennsylvania.  It can be divied up easily between PA-18, PA-9, PA-4, and maybe PA-5 without endangering Republican control (and while making Altmire more endangered).  

---

by: eschaton @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 04:20:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rick Santorum took a special interest

in the 2002 map. If you look at the gerrymander from the perspective of his 2002 win, it actually makes a great deal of sense for the Republicans. It also explains why they thought they could win PA-13.  

---

by: andgarden @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 04:41:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I thought the point of the current PA-12

was to pack two incumbent Democrats (John Murtha and Frank Mascara) into the same district.

---

by: emilysdad @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 05:30:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Close, but not quite

Mascara was actually put in PA-18 where he was expected to face an uphill battle against a seat drawn for then state senator Tim Murphy. Mascara instead opted to run in the PA-12 primary against Murtha, since that district contained much of his old territory.

Meanwhile, in a move of inexplicable hubris, Melissa Hart declined state legislator attempts to draw her a more secure PA-04 district. She said she did not want to lose her Democratic constituents because she believed she could turn them into Republicans.

We see how that worked out for her..

---

by: roguemapper @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 07:46:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

hahahaha

on a day which began with tragic and awful news, some humor to lighten the gloom is very much appreciated.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/

---

by: sapelcovits @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 07:55:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I guess there's brutal

and then there's overkill.  I don't want to refight the 2010 but Altmire's 2010 foe was considered to be very poor.  Underfunded and not rated very highly.  For that matter PA3's Kelly was perceived that way too but something perceptions are not right.  

PA4 is should be republican enough as it is given the right candidate and just adding 50K in GOP leaning area in Westmoreland and making no other changes should be enough to tip it over the edge.  If you nibble on the edges like I suggest it becomes nearly as republican as PA10 currently is.  

I am can see a Beaver Falls move or maybe even the southern plunge to really lockup PA18.  I don't see both of them.  Just my guess.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 13:32:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Altmire

is now a fairly entrenched incumbent, though - 6 years is enough time to become known and liked. I feel like any R will face trouble trying to knock him off in a district that's mostly the same as his current one. A much safer option would be to create a district with a roughly equal PVI (R+7 or so) but very few Altmire constituents - that would effectively force him to run as a non-incumbent, where he'd face a major uphill battle.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 16:22:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

But, why not?

Why not sink as many Democrats as possible into Doyle's district? It might not be pretty on the map, but it's the classic gerrymander move. In other states, 'just enough' is not the standard legislators chase in gerrymanders. They try to make districts as safe for their party as possible. In other words, partisanship trumps geography. The only common rationale for crafting more compact districts rather than maximizing partisan control has been when legislators want to use compactness as a defense against VRA challenges. That doesn't apply here.

In any case, this is what I would actually do if I were the PA GOP legislature:

1) Create a fourth Philly area Democratic vote sink so as to push PA-06, PA-07, and PA-08 outward and ensure GOP control of those seats.

2) Dismantle PA-17 in the exchange. Holden can run in the new Philly Dem vote sink if he wants.

3) Dismantle PA-12 and create the most Democratic seat possible for PA-14 to ensure GOP control/takeover of PA-04 and PA-18 (something akin to my map).

4) Shore up all the remaining GOP seats.

So, you get rid of Critz & Altmire but give Holden a safe seat in exchange for making reasonably safe seats for all the current GOP incumbents.

---

by: roguemapper @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 16:52:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I understand your point

and after the intial shock might come to live with Beaver Falls & Pittsburg hookup.  The lines are so contorted now in Westmoreland county between PA12 & PA18 one could argue that blob like district linking Beaver falls & Pittsburg would be decent enough looking.  I would certainly widen it out a bit and pass on the move into Fayette county.

I certainly believe in advancing one's party's interest in redistricting but there is an advantage to society and some political advantage to concise uniformed lines.

I suggest in PA3 that the parts of Warren county & Venago put placed back into PA5. Kelly did great in Armstrong county-he is from the southern part of the district.  No reason not to unite Armstrong county in PA3 and put the other two counties completely in PA5.  Plus give PA3 the rest of Mercer county.  Then just shave the top tier of Lawrence county or however much you need to equalize populations.  If the district-say is 53.9% Bush instead of 54.1% Bush 2004 so what.  

I hate to put a political price on the Bever falls move but 2% might be it.  If you can do as I suggest with lawrence & mercer county and keep Beaver county mostly intact then so let it ride.  

Going back to 2004 numbers if you can do PA4 at 55% without splitting Beaver county just don't do it.  I don't think Altmire is a settled incumbent especially if you force if out of McCandless township.  Give him 100K in new area in Westmoreland county and he might be toast.  He faced a second tier to third tier foe in 2010.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 17:36:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nothing to do against T Holden

If you put not him in a R+10 district he will win, even against one of the (weak) republican incumbents he have around. And you can not put him in a R+10 district without endanger more a lot of other seats.

Even I doubt the republicans can do something against J Altmire. He seems not as strong as Holden but he is able for endanger every other republican in a R+5 district. And if the republicans put him in a R+10 district, they will be endangering again a lot of seats.

The districts of Fattah, Brady, Schwartz and Doyle will be also D+ seats. Sure.

---

by: abgin @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 21:51:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

you could be right

I have not seen Altmire close up and while he did win in 2010 it was not "Holden like".  51-49 is not striking the fear in the hearts of GOP redistricting experts.

Plus his foe in 2010 was strictly second tier.

His foe did,however, do fairly decent in Allegany & Butler & Westmoreland county.

Altmire won huge in Beaver plus he ran way ahead of Sestak in Lawrence & Mercer county.  So who knows?

You can't try to sink Altmire by pulling Kelly & Murphy under so I say if Beaver Falls plungs is your only choice do it but I personally think make a % or two more GOP and give him new area in Westmoreland county.  Plus the GOP's best hope for this seat is a top candidate.

---

by: rdelbov @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 22:03:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, Holden won 56-44

about the same as supposedly safe Allyson Schwartz.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/

---

by: sapelcovits @ Mon Jan 10, 2011 at 00:32:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It might be a case of show me the money

as Schwartz's foe spent 926K while Holden's foe spent 374K.

Rothfuss in PA4 actually spent 1.2 million(including primary) so that's decent.  He got outspent 2-1 but 1.2 million is not chicken feed.

Another million could knocked Holden down a couple more points-maybe?  

---

by: rdelbov @ Mon Jan 10, 2011 at 01:08:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

don't think Holden's district is in the Philly media market

so probably a lot cheaper than Schwartz's.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/

---

by: sapelcovits @ Mon Jan 10, 2011 at 01:52:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's true

but Holden still outspent him by nearly 5-1

---

by: rdelbov @ Mon Jan 10, 2011 at 03:12:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, Schwartz spent $3.4M.

I think Holden is just a very strong candidate.

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/

---

by: sapelcovits @ Mon Jan 10, 2011 at 08:53:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh

I don't disagree one bit--Holden is a premier campaigner and very entrenched.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Mon Jan 10, 2011 at 13:47:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

There are too many Democrats in SW PA

SW PA needs only one Dem district. There's absolutely no reason to go soft on Altmire; when you take out a 70% Obama or so 14th district, the remainder of PA west of the Susquehanna went about 54% for McCain. That's an overall score of R+8. Giving Altmire a R+10 district is really easy, so long as Shuster is willing to let his ultra-ultra-safe 9th drop down to merely ultra-safe territory. I've actually drawn a map that puts Altmire in with Kelly in a R+13 district.  

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 23:02:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think we need more democrats in SW PA

Unfortunately PA will have a republican redistricting.

---

by: abgin @ Mon Jan 10, 2011 at 20:34:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In NE Pennsylvania, someone will have to learn to sink or swim

Barletta and Marino both can't be strengthened up, Scranton and Wilkes-Barre make sure of that. Whoever gets one or both of those places is going to have to put in a lot of work to hold on, especially in a presidential year. As they are both freshman, it's hard to tell who gets the less favorable district.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.

---

by: DrPhillips @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 18:14:02 PM UTC

They actually can both be made secure

...by giving W-B/S to Holden as part of a D+12ish Dem vote sink with Lehigh Valley and Reading. Then give the rest of NE PA to Barletta and move Marino's district to the Susquehanna Valley (he's from Williamsport, after all). That gives Barletta a R+7ish seat and Marino a R+9ish one. Almost too easy.

The hard part is in the southeast - there's no way all 5 reps in the Philly area can be strengthened significantly. You can make 2 R Seats and 3 Swing seats, but that's about it unless one of them retires or runs against Casey.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

---

by: shamlet @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 18:31:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I personally don't think

Marino needs to have an improved district.  PA10 by some measures is more republican then the current PA16 and was a 60% Bush district in 2004.  

Marino for whatever reason had fundraising woes while Carney had a stockpile of cash.  Carney seemed like a perfect fit for the district with pro gun and anti abortion views.

Marino, however, found his campaign footing and he raised a good bit of money late.  He got  55% against a super campaigner who seemed taylor made for the seat.  

Marino will not be outraised in 2012-he has two district offices plus 7 workers in them building local support for him.  He's the got congressional frank and all the other perks that come with being an incumbent congressman.  

I think 55% against an incumbent means he needs to step up and rather then be protected he needs to remain about the same or maybe be fractionally lower GOP% wise.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Sun Jan 09, 2011 at 20:51:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree about the 4D, but not about the 14R

Even in the short term, because the republicans will have many troubles for defeat T Holden and J Altime who survive in R+6 district + republican wave year. Very difficult to see less than 6 democrats in the delegation of 2012.

I think we will have a lot of swing districts in PA, and I think the republicans need to go to find swing district if they want not to decide what republican will have less chance of survive.

---

by: abgin @ Mon Jan 10, 2011 at 20:41:23 PM UTC