Downstate

The thing about downstate is that it's probably no better for Democrats to be really aggressive than to be mildly aggressive. (As opposed to Chicagoland, where they can really go nuts - I'd be surprised to see more than 1 of the 5 Chicago area Republicans standing in 2 years). I think no matter what you wind up with 4-2 maps as far as downstate goes. I feel like Johnson could probably win your 11th, as he already represents Urbana and Danville and has a solid base there. Plus he's not a fire-breathing conservative and is probably acceptable to moderates in the Chicago exurbs.

What I would do for Downstate is to simply chop up Schilling and put the Quad Cities (and maybe even Peoria too) in with Manzullo. Manzullo is probably going to retire sooner rather than later, and his district (unlike those further downstate) is getting more Dem friendly. Then just let Schock, Kinzinger, Johnson, and Shimkus have more-or-less seats to their current ones. Downstate is getting more Republican and if you try to go really crazy there you might wind up putting some seats that Dems should win easily in danger.

Also, I don't think JJJ is going to like that 2nd at all. He would be at real risk of losing the primary in a district with that small a black majority and pushed that far out of Chicago.

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

---

by: shamlet @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 02:38:38 AM UTC

It's a "first-draft" for me ..

I feel that w/ partisan data in Application, much better map can be drawn.

Re. Johnson, indeed it's possible he could win in new IL-11, but a Democrat would have a much better chance in that part of IL under this map than under current lines - and all the territory in the new IL-11 comes solely from existing GOP-held districts - so Democratic chances in IL-11 are increased w/o putting any adjoining Democrats in danger, as no territory is taken out of other Dem.-held districts (I tried to apply this rule throughout large parts of the map, though not necessarily in the Chicagoland area) ...

Re. IL-2 and the other 2 black-majority districts, I tried to draw whereby black population is at least 12 points more than the white pop. (not just a bare 51/49 type of thing) .. in the case of IL-7, it's a 15-point margin .... Granted, IL apparently does not register by party, so I see the danger in making IL-1, IL-2, IL-7 not "black enough" and winding up w/ white Dem. nominee somehow ... but the flip side of the coin is that the "added" territory to these districts leans very, very GOP ... for ex., in the new IL-2, Iroquois Co. was one of only a few in IL that did not vote for Obama in his 2004 Senate race, and in next door Ford Co., he only won by ½ % -- so not sure how many of those hyper-GOP areas would all of a sudden all decide to vote in a Democratic primary ??

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:01:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's probably best for the state Democratic party to

get rid of Schock and Kinzinger.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:06:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

if this map worked out as designed ..

the only Republicans left would be Shimkus, Manzullo and Johnson ...

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:17:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bless you! :)

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:18:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

To keep Schock and Kinzinger only benefit to the republicans

No sense since a democratic point.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 06:22:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I detest Schock

He is openly pro-torture and pines for the days when you could smash a detainee's head against a false wall amongst other unspeakable atrocities.

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

---

by: LookingOver @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 06:28:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Is Kinzinger older or younger than Schock?

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 21:00:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If I remember well a little older

Schock 1981 and Kinzinger 1978.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 21:41:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Correct

You can look it up here.

---

by: emilysdad @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 22:59:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

should have added ..

that in the new IL-2, 68% of the new district's population is currently represented by an African-American (either Jackson or Rush) so for over 2/3 of the pop. it should not be a new "experience" and I wouldn't necessarily expect some sort of racist, knee-jerk reaction to vote for someone who's not black in a Democratic primary in these districts if the lines are changed in this manner ....

(likewise, in the proposed IL-1, 69% of the pop. is currently represented by an African-Am., either Rush, Jackson or Davis ... and in the new IL-7 here that figure is 63%)

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:15:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

one more thing re. Johnson ...

which forgot to mention ... why would Johnson run in the new IL-11 (56% Obama) when he could just as easily run in the new IL-15 (42% Obama); he would represent almost as much of the new IL-15 as of the new IL-11, and there would be no other GOP incumbent in the new IL-15, so it would seem like the more logical choice ... I took things like this into consideration when designing these lines - not just an increase in Dem. % but how does changing the district lines affects where particular incumbents will run ... to make the map as "Democratic-friendly" as possible (but again, just a first-draft) ...

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:36:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Shimkus

I feel like Shimkus would probably want to move and run in the 15th because it's more of his former territory, and there's no way Johnson beats Shimkus in a primary.

It is a good plan for Democrats because it'll be hard to predict where the incumbents will run, but you can't assume that they're all acting unilaterally and in the sole interest of returning to congress in the safest seat possible. I think party leadership would sit down with the reps in this situation and sort out who runs where by dangling treats (i.e. Presidential appointments should the GOP win the WH, or institutional support for a GOV or SEN run in 2014) in exchange for those who don't force bloody primaries. IL Rs know all of them won't be returning, and I imagine at least a couple of them are willing to crack deals in exchange for stepping aside.

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

---

by: shamlet @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:50:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Perhaps too aggressive, but I like

the way you unpack Chicago and the opportunities you create for Democrats. Considering what the Republicans have done with Florida and Texas, the turnabout seems only fair here. I really respect that you've dived for political data. I also can't wait until we have Jeff's 2010 averages for IL.  

---

by: andgarden @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 02:41:20 AM UTC

it was extremely

cumbersome to get and apply the precinct data, hence the map can be improved upon significantly; the Application is really a miracle when the partisan data is input and I can't wait for Dave to do it ..

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:20:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I love using Dave's app

on Illinois. It's the most exciting state.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:25:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for posting this map

and I suspect it will not be the last here on Illinois.  This is the big game for democrats in redistricting.  As I said before this state is the canvas that every map democratic map drawer will try to do up a Mona Lisa on.  This is really the only state of any state with any significant GOP congressman that democrats can draw maps on. 1st let me return to earlier points-sorta goldie oldies of Cook county.

a. Your two  hispanic seats at 63 & 59% are unlikely to elect hispanic congressman.  They may elect democratics but are unlikely to elect hispanic congressman.  CD4  cast 80K votes this year (74% hispanic) and CD8 for instance(95% white) cast 200K votes this year.  That gives you a good ratio for hispanic turnout.  The hispanic state legislators will not go for this arrangement.  How many seats that are 63% H or below that number and elect hispanic?  There is ID1 & WA3 that do but there are special circumstances that do not apply in Cook county IL.  If you want a second hispanic seat you need to ditch Lipsinski.  If you can't get to 70% or below 20% white forget it.

b1. The three AA seats are what I call "complex" and quick easy answers do not apply.  For instance when Daley announced his retirement there was spectulation about Davis-Rush and Jesse Jackson jr. running for Mayor.  They don't want to be Mayor of Kankakee they want to be considered for Mayor of Chicago. If they don't represent the city they lose position in the community.  These moves will not fly with the AA legislators.

b2.   A side issue is that CD1 is currently 27%W  CD2 is 25% white and CD7 is 27% white.  The current make-per your map is 40-38-36 % white.  Due to lower turnouts the majority of primary and or GE voters could be white in some upcoming elections.  These are likely to stay democratic but will they stay AA or will they re-elect three firebrand democrats?  Instead of having safe seats they will have to fight for them every year.  Seats like these-IMO -with not fly with AA state legislators.

C. Finally its the bridge too far syndrome.  This is not an attack on your map.  Its a great map and could be 15-3 in a 2008 like election year.  What was the numbers like in 2010 for Mark Kirk in these district lines?  IMO you have to drawn lines not just for a 2006/2008 scenerio but a 1994 or 2010 scenerio.  What good will it do if you are 15-3 in 2012 if you need up 9-9 in 2014?

I am not attacking this map so much as using my crystal ball to see how people will react it.  Trying too much in my opinion but we will see.  Maybe the democrats will try it.

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 03:38:09 AM UTC

thanks for the good points ...

a. "How many seats that are 63% H or below that number and elect hispanic?"

--- 9 seats (AZ-4, AZ-7, CA-18, CA-39, CA-43, NJ-13, NM-3, NY-12, NY-16) - almost ½ of the Hispanic Caucus ... and TX-28 is just barely above 63%

b1. "If they don't represent the city they lose position in the community.  These moves will not fly with the AA legislators."

--- under existing lines, significant portions of IL-1, IL-2, IL-7 already go outside Chicago city line; in the case of IL-1 and IL-2 many blacks are now in suburban Cook Co.

b2.  see my answers above to shamlet

c. not sure about Mark Kirk, but tried to estimate Kerry numbers.  In IL-1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 12 & 13 Democratic representatives would be basically guaranteed under this map (that's 9 seats, which is 1 more than the Dems. currently hold) ... in IL-8, IL-11, IL-14, & IL-17, the Dem. % goes up significantly - all GOP-held seats now - so what does the Dem. party have to lose in those ? ... In IL-6, too, a district is created that could very well elect a Dem. (as explained) ... only district I wasn't happy with (as explained in diary) was my new IL-5 (too low Dem. performance & Quigley lives outside it, I think ?, in a lake-side Chicago neighborhood - but, again, this is just a first-draft ..

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:08:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

CA-18

Dennis Cardoza is of Portuguese--not Hispanic--descent.

---

by: emilysdad @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:57:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

good point ...

but he is apparently member of Hispanic Caucus ...

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 07:25:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Costa

That may be like Steve Cohen being in the Black Caucus as his district is heavily black even though he isn't.

41, Ind, CA-05

---

by: sacman701 @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 17:46:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Cohen is not in the Congressional Black Caucus

though there's a very good argument to be made that he should be.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  

---

by: Pan @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 22:43:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Great points on Hispanic

seats but I do note that several are between 59% and 63% plus the % of white voters are lower then in these Chicago seats.  In the case AZ7 & TX28 2010 election results shows what the problem is with 63% hispanic seats and that is they are vulnerable to election losses.

Yes CD1 & CD2 are out of Chicago now but the majority of the district is in the city.  Not now as it appears that CD1 & CD2 are mostly out of Chicago now.  

My quick look at this map shows that IMOthat up to 9 seats could go GOP and perhaps even 10.  The two hispanic seats and the three AA seats may be democratic but their numbers are such that they will almost certainly see competitive races for the next ten years.  The current AAA congressman and Congressman G. are going to look at Quigley and Schanowsky and say "why us-why are we tossed in seats we have to fight for?".  

I see this map as a bridge too far with way too many competitive seats for the democrats.  It looks a like KY1991 when the democrats went for 6D-0R.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 14:08:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

several points in reply ...

"Yes CD1 & CD2 are out of Chicago now but the majority of the district is in the city.  Not now as it appears that CD1 & CD2 are mostly out of Chicago now. "
-- That's currently true only for IL-1; as far as IL-2, Chicago forms only 40% of the current IL-2.  (I don't have access to the Application right now, but will let you know what % of the proposed districts are in Chicago ...)

"up to 9 seats could go GOP and perhaps even 10.  The two hispanic seats and the three AA seats may be democratic but their numbers are such that they will almost certainly see competitive races for the next ten years. "
-- I don't think so ... districts that are all 76-78% Obama will not be competitive in a GE .. (sorry, but that's just a ludicrous statement - assuming you're talking about competitive in a partisan way ...)

" ...at Quigley and Schanowsky and say "why us-why are we tossed in seats we have to fight for?".  
-- That's a good point ... once the partisan data is input into Application, it will be easy to make Quigley's and Schakowsky's districts more Democratic - maybe 5 points more should do it ... (by sticking to just 1 Hispanic seat as you suggested, there should be an "excess" of Democrats that can then be attached to IL-5, IL-6 & Il-9 ...)

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 16:41:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think you

greatly underestimate the turnout difference between the hispanic community and the local white voters.  White voters are more then twice as likely to vote as the hispanic voter.  You also underestimate the difference between voting for John Kerry democrat as opposed what  a suburban voter will vote when the candidate is  an inner city hispanic democrat. You can't go by 59% Kerry and think its a democratic seat.  For a white suburban democrat-yes but not an inner city hispanic.

In a 59% hispanic district the majority of the voters will be white and it will close in with a 63% seat.  

There is a huge difference for instance between a Cook county voter and a voter from Kankakee or Will county.  You cannot plug in 40% for Kerry and think Jesse Jackson Jr or Bobby Rush will get any way close to that %.

I might add that with no party registration you will see the same situation in primaries.  Davis & Rush & jesse Jackson may very well face their primary electorate is 40 to 50% white. They will not stand for this.   I have spoke my peace on this and I we will find out later what happens.

My Crystal ball still sees a much less dramatic map but as I said I understand those who think Illinois has to be a wild attempt at 15-3 or 14-4 because where else can the democrats do it?  

I think in Springfield-later this year-much cooler heads will prevail.  You will see one hispanic seat with 70% H for congressman G. Three AA seats with all at 55% or above plus the white % will be nearer to 30% or lower.  There will be a CD17 like the current one plus a weird seat around Springfield-Bloomington-Champaign that could go democratic. Plus Costello and the 3 current white democrats will have safe seats.  You will see Walsh's seat gone and IL10 will be more democrat and might send Dold home.  You will not see DuPage county split 6 ways.  That's what my crystal ball says.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 17:42:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

???

"You can't go by 59% Kerry and think its a democratic seat.  For a white suburban democrat-yes but not an inner city hispanic."

--  Where are you getting 59% Kerry for any of the proposed AA or Hispanic districts here ???  They're all at least 70% Kerry and the proposed IL-3 you're hung up on would be approx.. 73% Kerry ...

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 18:11:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I am sorry but

I saw the wrong number but I stand by my other points.

Was that point I raised that you had a problem with?  

I mentioned CD4 having 82K votes in 2010 and a fair number of those votes came from the white community within that seat.  Nearby white seats had 2 to 2 1/2 times the votes compared to the heavily hispanic CD4.  NO comments at all?

I will restate that the 4 current  minority held  seats in IL will may have majority white voter base on.  Not a VRA issue but what will minority pols say to that? No the seats will  likely stay democratic but they may not stay AA.  

Here's another side issue.  Not every democratic state legislator in IL comes from Chicago.  Your map basically increases the political clot of Chicago which should be losing 3/4 of a shot.  It has the effect of diminishing the clout of suburban & rural legislators.  

As I said I predict cooler heads will prevail in Springfield and a map will be drawn in a manner similar to what I have suggested.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 18:41:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Some harsh points

If so many white people are voting for Rush, Jackson and other Dems, why would they have a problem representing more white districts?

Which of the neighboring seats had over 200K votes in 2010, I didn't see many?

I'd liek to see someone take the challenge of improving turnout in IL-04 too.  It has terrible turnout (of total population, not sure about RV's) but I guess I'm not sure why we still wouldn't want the majority Hispanic district, but maybe I missed the point.

IL-04 voter turnout:

2004: ~123K votes
2006: ~80K votes
2008: ~135K votes
2010: ~82K votes

Sure its the lowest vote total district in the state, but it votes solidly Dem.  The seats have to be based on population, not vote totals, so i think you can do many things with IL-04 and still end up with a solidly Dem district.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 19:48:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I did mean to be harsh

but we have a discussion the other day and there are 4 or 6 AA congressman that represent on  of 350 majority white districts in the USA. There are two hispanic congresspeople (Herrerra & Labrador) in majority white seats.  

There are natural problems with city versus suburbs versus rural area conflicts.  Just because you can draw a map linking the South side of Chicago to Kankakee don't expect to that happen.  

We also had a discussion of primary battles that AA  congressman will eventually face as everyone does. Look at MI13-MD4-GA4-AL7 in recent history.  A local AA pol takes on the entrenched congressman.  The AA congressman wins the black vote but the white voters oust them in a primary.  When is that more likely to happen?  When the % of white voters is 20% or 30% or 40% or 50%?  

I might that there is a big difference between Cook county inner suburbs lower income white voters then rural or suburban voters in DuPage or Will or Kankakee county.  One type of voter Jesse Jackson jr or Bobby Rush will be able to win over and the other they will not.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 21:18:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I didn't mean harsh so much as bad or angry

But just that it seemed liek the racial divide you seem to see seems more than it really might be.  

I could also be wrong, living here in Philly with it ethnic makeup being what it is I guess we just don't have the need or ability to have minority majroity districts.  Philly actually has whie Dems so I guess it just eludes me that blacks always have to represent blacks, Hispanics hispanics, and whites whites.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 22:07:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I did not take your words as being

harsh when I type about the racial divide in America its more reporting then feeling it.  

Here's the tell of two districts in TX

Hispanic 68%  White 27%  TX27
Hispanic 66%  White 22%  TX29

The white democrat in TX29 has never had to hustle for his seat while the democrat in TX27 has lost his.  I might add that TX27 actually has greater hispanic vote turnout then TX29 does.  In TX27 the hispanic community was settled in before 1800 or so.

Since you are in Philly I ask you this question.  What would Chaka Fattah think if he lost 50% of his city of Philadelphia area?  Lets say he still keeps his district at 50% black but now has 350K white voters in delaware county.  So his district is 51% AA in Philly and 49% white voters in Delaware  county?  Would he really be willing to give up a substantial portion of his inner city district to take on 49% in delaware county?  I am not talking Chester city but Delaware county.  Delaware county voted for Obama but that's Obama--how about Chaka Fattah?  

I personally think he would facing primary and GE fights for ten years.  He might win everyone but why take on the hassle?  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 22:43:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Primaries in minority seats

We also had a discussion of primary battles that AA  congressman will eventually face as everyone does. Look at MI13-MD4-GA4-AL7 in recent history.  A local AA pol takes on the entrenched congressman.  The AA congressman wins the black vote but the white voters oust them in a primary.  When is that more likely to happen?  When the % of white voters is 20% or 30% or 40% or 50%?

(1)  I haven't seen any evidence that black voters voted for the incumbents.  I live in Michigan, so I would have expected to read at least a little about it if it were clearcut.

(2)  If you are right, then the result is still a black congressman -- just a different one.  That is probably an upgrade from the perspective of an ambitious black politician who isn't already the incumbent.  Like, say, those in the state legislature drawing the lines.

---

by: JimJ @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 22:43:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In MI-13, MD-04, GA-04 (2002 & 2006) & AL-07

the voters made the right call every time.

---

by: emilysdad @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 23:15:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I generally agree too

as well.  The book is still out on the new guy from MI13 but he seems very well spoken and articulate.

My point is, however, Jesse Jackson Danny Davis and Bobby Rush are not eager to let the next young turk come in.  They have spent years catering and winning support in the AA community.  If the vote blend changes where does that leave them?  Jesse Jr. has spent years looking after the urban interests of his district.  He has voted for mass transit money but all his new rural districts need road money.  This is a forced example but yes projects are directed towards either urban type projects versus rural.  Jesse has probably voted against the rural interest many times in the past.  In a primary he might pay a price for that.  

Jesse Danny and Bobby care about themselves  being re-elected.  The Easiest path for them is to have an urban based seat with friendly territory.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 02:17:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

A majority of Jackson's district is still in the city.

I would also assume a majority of the Democratic base of the proposed Congressional District. It's not like the rural area makes up a large chunk of the electorate either way.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 02:23:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

actually ..

as I pointed out above, Jackson's district becomes MORE urban under this remap (currently 41% is in Chicago, while under this map that increases to 48% in Chicago).

---

by: silver spring @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 02:52:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Chicago population is the same

as you keep the population the same but he ends up losing Cook county suburbs.  He is losing Cook count suburbs but is gaining rural area.  

This seat is picking up 200K in rural population.  It can't be considered more urban.  The suburban parts of the current CD2 are five minutes away from subway and bus stops.  The 200K people in the four rural counties are in no way urban.  

Yes I mentioned city and suburban but all of Cook county is certainly urban.  None of it rural.  These four counties are all rural and now this seat is 30% rural.

I might add that rural voters are more likely to vote then urban voters so its closer to 33% rural. I am not a betting man but my crystal ball sees CD2 stopping at the Will county line and 55% AA at a minimum. So it will get some Will county precincts but no further.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 03:20:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

But that would be to Jackson's advantage to trade suburbs for rural area

He'd be trading Democratic voters for Republican ones, and given that his only challenge is in a primary, I can't imagine, even with open primaries, Jackson has nothing to worry about absorbing those areas (and I can't imagine JJJ throwing a fit over it either).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

---

by: DGM @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 03:44:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dude, I've heard you make that claim before

We also had a discussion of primary battles that AA  congressman will eventually face as everyone does. Look at MI13-MD4-GA4-AL7 in recent history.  A local AA pol takes on the entrenched congressman.  The AA congressman wins the black vote but the white voters oust them in a primary.  When is that more likely to happen?  When the % of white voters is 20% or 30% or 40% or 50%?

You paint a very lovely story here, but you haven't shown any proof of it happening that way (unless their primary opponent has real pull with the black vote anyways, as a united black vote will win any Democratic primary in a district that is above 50% black, period).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

---

by: DGM @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 02:14:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

you may be right (?) on some ...

of your points ... we'll see ...

I think that once the partisan data is input into Application it will be much easier to draw and redraw these lines where you can indeed have 3 AA seats that are 55%+ and still have the surrounding seats become much more Democratic than they are today (maybe doing 14-4 instead of 15-3; this is just a first-draft) -- and esp. if IL-4 is the only Hispanic district ... then all those Dems. in what was supposed to be my IL-3 can make the revised IL-3, IL-5, IL-6, etc. more Democratic (esp. in combination w/ reducing 15-3 to 14-4) ... I can't wait for the partisan data for IL ...  

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 20:40:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

just to follow up on Chicago ..

as I said I would ... under the proposed map, the percentage of IL-1 and IL-7 that remains in Chicago does go down -- to 53% for IL-1 and 47% for IL-7 ...

however, the percentage of IL-2 that is part of Chicago actually goes UP from 41% currently to 48% under the proposed map !

---

by: silver spring @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 01:14:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

what's interesting ...

 is that if only 1 Hisp. district is created, then IL-6 can be made to be another "Democrat  guaranteed" district (instead of just being marginal) ... so the 2 hisp. districts in IL actually hurt Dem. prospects ...

perhaps, it would be better to have 1 hisp. district (IL-4) and then have both IL-3 and IL-6 both at around 67% Obama (instead of one at 78% and the other at 56%) ... IL Dems. indeed may ultimately take such a course ...

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:16:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is my point about the VRA in states like Illinois

I see not the interest of create more VRA districts in states like Illinois when it mean other districts can go to the republican hands as result of hold too many democratic votes in few districts.

Still I think you can have margin for improve a little your 56-57% Obama districts and your 48-49% Kerry districts without need to cut the second hispanic district. But you know the numbers better than I know at this point.

I see not the hispanic or the african-american legislators going against a democratic Gerrymander map. They can call for little improvements for their ethnic groups, but not until the extreme of endanger other future democratic seats in the suburbs of Chicago or in the downstate. Not big trouble from here. They are enough intelligent for understand what one 90% Obama district mean more than one 40% Obama district.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 06:15:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I also just realized something.

This is the first time since the passage of the VRA when redistricting is being done during a Democratic administration.  This could bode well in states like Alabama, SC, among others.

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

---

by: LookingOver @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 06:21:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

actually, I think, that even in 2010 ...

the Dem. would win in the new IL-8 (Bean lost by a point, and the new dist. is approx. 4 points more Dem.);

IL-6 - Lipinski would have probably won against Roskam even in 2010 - as explained in detail in the diary;

IL-5 - Quigley would have likely won as he got 71% in a district that's only 11 points more Democratic than the proposed district;

IL-14 - Foster would have likely won in 2010 for reasons explained (he comfortably won the over ½ of the proposed district that's currently a part of IL-14 - Aurora, Elgin, etc.)

-- so that's another 4 districts that would have likely gone Dem. under these lines even in 2010 (so total of 13 out of 18 seats that would have likely gone Dem. - even in 2010) ...

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:41:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Partisan data

I can't wait for partisan data for Illinois.  What percentage Obama would be considered a safe Dem seat in Illinois?  Obama had the home state advantage, so something a little higher than other states would make sense.

---

by: TXMichael @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:04:17 AM UTC

We're supposedly going to get 2010 statewide

averages, bypassing the problem of trying to correct for Obama's (uneven IMO) overperformance.  

---

by: andgarden @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:14:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Averages

'04/'08 averages?

---

by: TXMichael @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:23:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, averages of all 2010 contested

statewide races.  

---

by: andgarden @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:26:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

wow

that must take a lot of time! lol

---

by: TXMichael @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:34:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nah, it's coming along pretty nicely.

It'd be much further along, but for work getting in the way for the past two and a half weeks.

Also, there are a bunch of random downstate counties where data is impossible to track down, so there will be less detail for those.  However, Cook and the collar will be at the precinct level, as will a few others like Sangamon, Winnebago, Kankakee, DeKalb, etc; others will be at the township level.  Unfortunately, some of the downstate counties will remain at the county level until I get the urge to file FOIA requests...  

---

by: jeffmd @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 05:32:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Really excited about this Jeff

Thanks for all your hard work.

---

by: andgarden @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 05:43:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks so much for your incredibly hard work on this …

Having tried to work w/ individual precincts for this diary, I realize how tedious this must be ... I tried to keep as many wards and townships whole when drawing the map, just so that there would be less math to do ! - but ofcourse that has an effect on how the map came out.  In Lake Co. had horrible time making sense of the precincts, as the numbering appears to have changed completely over the last 10 years, and in Chicago had to basically keep tables on paper, as couldn't convert into spreadsheet format ... out of the counties I had split on the map, couldn't find data at all for Bureau, Carroll, Jersey, Perry and Vermilion ... really looking forward to your data ... like I said in the diary, can't really do these maps correctly w/o fully utilizing the Application ..

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 07:27:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

just this is my point too

about Jeff's work, about David's work, and about your work here too. A lot of work.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 23:15:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

i think it actually depends on what part ..

of the state of IL ... biggest shifts towards the Dem. between 2004 & 2008 were in Chicago collar counties, then northern and central IL, Cook Co. and last, southern IL ...

but great idea to use 2010 results as andgarden mentions ..

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:22:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I use about 59-60% Obama as a baseline for "safe"

or at least "solid enough to avoid falling, even though it may be close in a bad year". The only district at or above that number held by a Republican is IL-10.

---

by: Johnny Longtorso @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 20:07:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Obama numbers in Illinois

should be treated differently from Obama numbers outside of his home state. I'd apply the same guideline to Hawaii. How many points should be discounted from his totals in order to accurately judge how Democratic a district is, I wouldn't know.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  

---

by: Pan @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 22:48:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

when i figure out pvis

i think the kerry numbers are perfectly fine

this means dold and schilling leans dem
roskam, biggert, kinzinger are tossups
walsh, hultgren, manzullo lean gop
the others are safe gop barring scandal

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 Jan 12, 2011 at 23:14:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Or, for that matter, McCain #s in Arizona

---

by: emilysdad @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 23:18:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

True

I think the Obama numbers in Illinois have an important value looking to the redistricting and looking to 2012 elections.

Just 2012 will be again a Obama year in Illinois.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 23:22:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes

But redistricting is usually for 10 years, so it is not smart to base it overly on 2012-specific dynamics.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 06:30:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

True, I reject not the need of the 2010 or the 2004 data

But 2012 will give the first incumbents to these districts. My point is what 2008 Obama data are also important looking to 2012 in Illinois.

---

by: abgin @ Fri Jan 14, 2011 at 01:04:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Habitually I use 58-59% Obama

Just cause of the same reason.

Only I would down to 57% in few states like Oregon or New Mexico because I prefer to have 57% Obama districts than to have one R+.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 23:20:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Same here

I use 58%-59% on my maps for safe D districts.  Now in Illinois I think I may add 3 points and make 61%-62%.  Does anyone have any data which indicates how much a home state advantage helps a candidate?  I can't wait to get partisan numbers in Illinois

---

by: TXMichael @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 03:42:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

True, this can be right

Or this, or we can take a double condition like this:

(58-59% Obama or plus) + (50% Kerry or plus)

---

by: abgin @ Fri Jan 14, 2011 at 01:11:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Reflecting, I think your 6th is a bad call

I don't see how a Democrat like Lipinski wins a district with so much Republican suburbs. His profile isn't "moderate," it's "machine," right?

---

by: andgarden @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:25:42 AM UTC

you may very well be correct on that ...

"theoretically" he would have won even in 2010 ... as I mention in diary, 44% of the new district's population is comprised of current constituents of Lipinski's IL-3, while about 31% are currently a part of Roskam's IL-6 (and 57% of the new IL-6 would be in Cook Co. and 43% in DuPage Co.)   Lipinski won his district with 70% of the vote (with the Green getting 6%), while Roskam won his by "only" 64% (w/ no Green involved) ... Lipinski & Costello were only Dems. who actually got a bigger percentage of the vote in their districts in 2010 than Obama got in their districts in 2008 (and Lipinski did better among the two) ...

Now, "realistically", not sure what would have happened ... and you may be correct ... as I mentioned in reply to rdelbov, perhaps, it would be better to have 1 hisp. district (IL-4) and then have both IL-3 and IL-6 both at around 67% Obama (instead of one at 78% and the other at 56%) ...  

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 04:48:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lipinski's father was a blue dog

And I think the son would be too if he would be in a less democratic see. I think he would like to be in a more suburburban district.

Lipinski is a rare case.

---

by: abgin @ Fri Jan 14, 2011 at 01:14:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

But Naperville and Berwyn are very different suburbs

Lipinski's current district consists of Democratic, socially conservative, labor-oriented suburbs. Places like Naperville and Downers Grove are the opposite, Republican, socially moderate, pro-business.

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 @ Fri Jan 14, 2011 at 06:32:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wonderful map!

A masterpiece!

---

by: emilysdad @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 05:02:06 AM UTC

I support your bid

Very good bid for a first map. Sure you spend a lot of time doing it, the number of sources what you use is sign of it. I glad of see some truly democratic Gerrymander map. I agree with the introduction of your diary. It is necessary to go more agressive because the current map for Illinois is a previous republican Gerrymander map. And this must change.

Very interesting you include both 2008 and 2004 data for the current and the future districts. Many people think 2008 data give not the real pick of Illinois cause of Obama is from Chicago, but we can not forget 2012 will be again a Obama year. Then, I think we can not forget the Obama data.

I will bid to draw a 18-0 map for Illinois (as exercice finding the limits), and looking to your map, it seems pretty possible.

Thank you very much for this good work what give a better idea of the likely result of the new map for Illinois. I think we will see more D+ districts in Illinois what will send more democrats of left to the US House.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 05:55:16 AM UTC

thanks

pls. keep in mind the Kerry numbers are just estimates ...

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 07:29:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sure. Just this...

Just this is sign of your fine work.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 16:31:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

BTW, I think I like the 13th the best

That's exactly the kind of district that a Democratic gerrymander should create.  

---

by: andgarden @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 06:08:08 AM UTC

Great map

You have an evil mind and I love it. Can't help but wonder though whether the meandering, thin elements of some of these boudaries would make them completely unlikely to be adopted.

Also wondering what would happen if you drew up a 14-4 whether that could allow for much more compact disricts?

2010 Race Tracker Wiki

---

by: benawu @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 06:12:08 AM UTC

with 14-4 ..

ideally, we could get the Dem. numbers up significantly in the 14 Dem. districts to the point where they would all be "guaranteed" for us ..

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 07:31:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

i like it

except i think lipinski would lose. he's a pro-life machine urban democrat. that won't fly in dupage (even the pro-life part isn't super important), and it's a true toss up

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 Jan 12, 2011 at 06:28:47 AM UTC

Good

Toss him out for a better Democrat.

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

---

by: LookingOver @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 06:31:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lipinski was one Dem...

I didn't worry too much about as far as making sure he survives the remap .. hence I made this district where he's combined w/ Roskam -- figured he either wins (and the dist. is then represented by a conservative Dem., or he loses and the dist. is then represented by a conservative Republican) ...

on the flip side, Lipinski may be the only Dem. who could win in such a district ? (a more progressive Dem. might be in trouble here) ...

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 07:44:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I Think Your Last Line Might Be Onto Something

But I wouldn't miss him, overall. Quite like this map.

---

by: armand @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 17:35:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

i think your comment and those of two others here ...

have convinced me that it would be better to have 1 hisp. district (IL-4) and then have both IL-3 and IL-6 both at around 67% Obama (instead of one at 78% and the other at 56%) ... (sorry for repeating this comment a couple times, but it appears to answer several separate questions re. the IL-3/IL-6 area) ...that will be my goal in the "second draft"

---

by: silver spring @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 07:34:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Chicagoland

First of all, thanks for the excellent map and especiallly for all the work you put into coming up with partisan figures.

I just want to point out that the Illinois legislature passed SB3976 several days ago which includes the following rules on redistricting:

Section 5-5. Redistricting.
(a) In any redistricting plan ... Representative Districts shall be drawn ... to create crossover districts, coalition districts, or influence districts...

(b)The phrase "crossover district" means a district where a racial minority or language minority constitutes less than a majority of the voting-age population but where this minority, at least potentially, is large enough to elect the candidate of its choice with help from voters who are members of the majority and who cross over to support the minority's preferred candidate. The phrase "coalition district" means a district where more than one group of racial minorities or language minorities may form a coalition to elect the candidate of the coalition's choice. The phrase "influence district" means a district where a racial minority or language minority can influence the outcome of an election even if its preferred candidate cannot be elected.

Now, this language is certainly open to (endless) interpretation, but it could be taken to suggest that the Illinois legislature will be disinclined to reduce the minority percentage of the Chicago area seats to the extent that you do on your map.

On the other hand, it might be taken as a sign that the legislature will favor creating a greater number of 'influence' districts with lower proportions of minority voters over creating a lesser number of heavily majority-minority districts.

On another note, I agree with the person who suggested that a 14-4 map with more secure Dem districts is far preferable to a 15-3 map with more swing districts.

---

by: roguemapper @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 12:57:18 PM UTC

Here's the thing about legislation purporting

to guide the redistricting process: the legislature can ignore it, and only the last in time law (i.e., the actually redistricting plan) will be relevant.

One legislature can't bind a future legislature.  

---

by: andgarden @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 13:41:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bravo! Outstanding stuff

Two observations:

(1) The drawing of two Hispanic opportunity districts is interesting -- if it can be done it probably has to be done.  The 63% Mexican-American district is the most problematic, but it probably meets VRA thresholds.  The question is whether it is "compact" for purposes of the VRA.

(2) I think the Bush/Kerry percentages are really probably the most relevant, given Obama's "hometown hero" advantage (which extended into counties neighboring Illinois, if you look at the "change from '04" map.  I think a few of these districts -- 6 comes to mind -- would probably end up being more Republican than intended.  But given your constraints, this is really top-notch stuff.

---

by: curiousgeorge @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 14:01:16 PM UTC

Great job!

You use Chicago extremely well, maximizing the number of Democratic districts. Bravo.

I also think this would work in places like Pennsylvania, where heavily Democratic Philadelphia would smother moderate to conservative suburbs in places like Berks County. Sad that it can't happen...

NY-14, DC-AL (college) Distraught Mets fan

---

by: nycyoungin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 21:04:16 PM UTC

That is one ugly map

Reminds me of the New York map with a bunch of ribbons traversing from Buffalo to New York City.

---

by: InRepublican @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 21:05:32 PM UTC

It's a beautiful map! :)

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)

---

by: ndrwmls10 @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 21:08:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

:)

It is nice :)

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 23:46:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I LOVED that map.

Unfortunately, it was a 28-seat map and New York will only have 27 districts.

http://www.swingstateproject.c...

---

by: emilysdad @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 23:23:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

:)

For 27 districts I think it would be a little easier ;)

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 12, 2011 at 23:47:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey yeah abgin

I think you need to work on that, abgin. :)

And then we can have Chuck Schumer or Mario Cuomo or Sheldon Silver or someone figure out how to seduce a Republican State Senator or two so a congressional gerrymander can be approved. I'm willing to sacrifice the NY St. Senate for 'em. Then again, I don't live in New York...

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.

---

by: arealmlc @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 04:16:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Surely there's a GOP state Senator

in a Democratic district who'd like to be an ambassador someplace. :)

---

by: emilysdad @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 07:36:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I loved that map!

Also!

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.

---

by: arealmlc @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 04:18:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good map

IL-11 could be problematic in low turnout elections, so it would require a very strong Democrat with good political skills.

IL-6 could be won by a Republican, obviously, DuPage is heavily Republican and those portions of Cook are favorable to Republicans at times. The right candidate would be critical here and Lipinski is not it.

Other than that, he's great that you contained Republicans to large districts which include only the most hardcore GOP voters. There is little chance of moderate Republicans with crossover appeal grabbing any of the safe district on this map, which helps reduce the statewide GOP bench.

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

---

by: DrPhillips @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 04:34:27 AM UTC

Also, IL Dems

can draw a Texas-like State Legislature map that ensures that a Republican majority or near-majority anywhere is nigh impossible in the short and long term.

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

---

by: LookingOver @ Thu Jan 13, 2011 at 07:45:39 AM UTC