Beautiful

Hickenlooper needs to use the power of appointment, get himself a full Dem state legislature majority and pass this exact map.  I love how truly gerrymandered it is but at the same time, perfectly reasonable.  The 3rd maybe is stretching it and even while the 6th spans the entire state, it makes sense.

---

by: Andrew @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 00:19:14 AM UTC

Legislative vacancies in Colorado

are filled by appointment by party committees. Barring a party switch, we'll be stuck with a Republican House majority until 2012, when we should be heavily favored to win it back.

---

by: fatcathobbes @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 02:03:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for posting the map

and its probably 5D2 in most elections.

I note that this map neatly divides the minority communities in the denver area among three seats and puts rural hispanic counties in one of those  Denver based seats.  

Right now I am not sure this map could even pass the state senate which is 20D-15R.  Hispanic legislators would not be likely to vote for this bill as Salazar does not have a seat to run in. Plus in the urban area instead of attaching heavily hispanic Adams to Denver its farmed out to another district where its diluted.

I might add that any rural legislator worth his salt would see that this map pretty eliminates any rural seat from CO.

I might add for those folks who think a compact minorty majority seat must be created one could easily do that in the Denver area but this map, as noted, neatly divides the minority community into three seats.  This was what Gov Bilbo did to the Miss Delta during Jim Crow days.  Slice up the minorities so they don't have a seat to call their own.  I don't say this meanness but rather  I am  just giving historical context to such a plan.

I don't know what will happen in CO.  I suspect a bipartisan plan will evolve and will be passed.  If not you can bet that the GOP house will pass a minority majority plan for the Denver area.  As Noted I think a bipartisan standpat plan will pass.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 01:22:13 AM UTC

It would be interesting to see

a coalition of the Republicans and the Hispanic Democrats in the legislature come together to demand a majority-hispanic seat in the Denver area. Unlikely though, because any Hispanic legislature who did this would be seriously pissing off the Democratic Party leadership in CO. As as side note, I don't think John Salazar is running again in 2012. Hickenlooper just appointed him state Agriculture Commissioner. It seems more likely that he winds up as national Secretary of Agriculture once Vilsack retires.

Male, VA-08

---

by: drobertson @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 01:38:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sometimes I wonder how

far you can push people.  Kudos for Hickenlooper appointing Salazar to a post as the ex congressman had made rumbles about running for CD3.

There was more then a little grumbling, among hispanics, when Ritter passed over Salazar for the US senate seat his brother had.  When Salazar took the interior job and no hispanic took his place that cut the hispanic caucus in the senate in halve.  Not a knock on Bennett Ritter did not exactly show the hispanic community any love in 2009. So who  should be trying not to PO hispanics in CO?  

You would think Bennett-Hickenlooper-the state democratic party-the national party would rather be reaching out to hispanics trying to find a minority majority seat in CO. The hispanic community is a super key bloc in CO and that state looms large in 2012.

I have read here in this blog that 29%AA means 2 of 7 in SC-AL-LA.  Yet in CO where hispanics are 20% of population that does not translate into 1 of 7.  Denver area is ripe for a minority majority seat. Even if its only 51% hispanic that would be better then dividing the community up which would lessen the chance of electing one.

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 02:10:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You should brush up on your VRA law

Proportionality is not one of the criteria used in judging majority-minority districts. And judging from the revised map, it seems that the Hispanic population is spread out enough to make drawing a "reasonably compact" district difficult in Colorado. In areas like Alabama, where there's a group of counties with very high AA population, you can make 2 reasonably compact districts.

Now, do I think that a Hispanic opportunity district will have to be drawn? Yes, but it'll be the Hispanic politicians in the state legislature who get one drawn, rather than the Justice Department. Heck, you might even have a hard time proving racial polarization in voting patterns in CO.

And really, arguing that the CO Democrats are in trouble with the Hispanic population because they passed over one Hispanic politician for the Senate, in the state that gave us Tom Tancredo?
Yeah, I bet CO Hispanics are ready to defect to the GOP at a moment's notice.

---

by: LVDem @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 04:49:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

There are over 450K

hispanicss-AA -Asians in Denver & Adams county.

How could you not be able to draw a 60% minority majority seat?

The problem is you have to divide Denver and attach it to Adams hispanic community.  You can't attach Adams to Weld or Laramie county.  

The obvious solution is right there.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 13:11:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You can create a very compact VRA seat

as a crescent around the Denver area covering the West side, the sparsely populated inner Northern suburbs, and the North side of Aurora. I think it might be close to majority-Hispanic.

So, like CT, CO could be another unexpected place where a supreme court VRA decision could have some effect.

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

---

by: shamlet @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 02:01:31 AM UTC

Yes

Although that whole Connecticut thing seems kind of unlikely to me. If the supreme court is forcing the creation of VRA congressional seats in Connecticut, it is going to be a really interesting redistricting year.

But in CO, I think there is actually a solid case for drawing that new VRA seat. The question is, if the legislature does not draw a majority (or plurality) Hispanic seat, would the DOJ stop them? If the DOJ is more motivated by political reasons, they might not. If the DOJ doesn't intervene in that case, who else has standing to suit on VRA issues? Does the state attorney general have standing? That would be important, b/c the CO AG is a republican. I don't really have the legal background to know what the precedent is here.

Male, VA-08

---

by: drobertson @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 04:11:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for

updating for possible minority majority seat.  Something like that Denver/Adams county seat could be created by legislative bodies.  I personally do not think DOJ will get involved but it could be a legisltive creation.

I might add, however, that this shows the problems with getting to 5-2 in CO.  

Denver is split three ways.

Rural CO is basically denuded.

Boulder county is split two ways(significally as oppposed to the current split).

This is the type of map that would get a commission plan passed by the voters in this state.  So far the maps have been pretty clean as partisan control has been split the last few cycles.  

I see a 50-50 chance of a standpat plan plus a 40% chance of incumbent protection followed by a 1 in ten chance of a court fight.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 13:36:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It is interesting to see republicans calling for VRA districts in Colorado or Connecticut

when they have the necessary majority but do not it in SC, AL, TN, MS, TX...

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 13:20:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's politics.

I just wish they wouldn't try to argue about it on SSP.

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 @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 13:31:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Of course that is politics

I think also it is a little shameless.

I think it is in the nature of the right to find the own benefit always. And I play many times to the same game just cause of this.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 15:39:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't do politics here

and whatever people think my political believes are I leave that to their imigination.  

I believe I have been 100% consistent here on VRA matters.

1. I don't believe that the current rulings on VRA requires the creation of minority majority seats that are a result of "racial gerrymandering".  I hold that view whether a state is preclearance or not and that the law applies equally from Maine to CA.

2. There may some legitmate confusion on that point because many posters here will do a map on CO & ignore VRA for the creation of districts.  Yet at the same time they will do a congressional map where the creation of minority/majority is required.  I point out that you just can't use VRA as a hammer to nail republicans in SC & AL but not bother to draw VRA districts in CO or FL or CA.  Some may believe I am advocating the creation of a VRA seat but rather I am asking for a consistent approach.  If you believe in VRA requiring the creation of minority majority seats I urge people to be consistent in that view.  Don't pick and choose your states.  I am advocating it.

3. Some people here might also be confused between I also believe that current VRA rulings only affect the creation of judicially mandated minority majority seats.  I don't question anyone's sincerity but some might be confused on this point.  I don't believes its a judicial mandate to create a minority majority seat in CO but if the state legislators do it and the Governor signs that's okay.  So yes I see the creation of seats that are  minority majority seats in NV & CO but that's not a VRA matter but a political matter.  Likewise I don't see folks in SC Al & LA doing it for political reasons.

4. I might add that I believe that the current view of the law is that curent minority majority seats have judicial protection.  

I hope this clarifies my views.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 17:49:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

consistent approach?

I think it is not trouble of consistent approach.

I think the approach of the republicans what want the benefit of the republican side is pretty consistent. And I think the approach of the republicans what want the repeal of the VRA is also consistent (not good for the minorities, but also consistent).

As other example, my approach about this issue is find to create VRA districts where the minorities can be represented by people what go against their interest since my point (basically republicans) if they are not VRA districts. I think a generic democrat put not in risk the defense of the interest of the minorities what live in his/her district. I think this is also consistent and is the same approach for all the districts from Maine to Hawaii.

For Colorado? I think it is not necessary. D DeGette or J Polis can defend pretty good the interest of the latinos from Denver. And I tell this despite a latino district (for J Salazar, as example) would be not a trouble since the point of do a democratic gerrymander of Colorado like it is not for do a extreme democratic gerrymander of California.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 21:47:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I appreciate your

honesty.  I don't want to mischaractorize you but apparently VRA is okay as long as it advances the interest of the democratic party.  When it gets in the way of electing more democrats its needs to be ignored.

I am not unsympathic to that idea as the creation of AA seats in the 1991 cycle lead to a slew of GOP seats in numerous states.  I might add that while the GOP DOJ pushed that idea it was seconded by Sandy O and the four liberals on the Surpreme court.

Now policy has changed and the creation of new minority majority seats that require racial gerrymandering is now the law.  Yet seats that are already in place as minority majority have some protection.  Does that help the GOP.  I would say yes but that's a judicial fiat.

Finally I agree with 100% that a minority majority seat is not required in CO but what about hispanics in that state?  Maybe they would actually like to have a congressman of their heritage be a member?  Perhaps if the Gov had appointed a US senator or if democrats actually nominated a hispanic for one of the two safe D seats in that state an effort to create a minority majority seat would not gather steam.  Democrats & republicans don't do good in nominating minorities.  

I fully expect hispanics to push for a seat in CO.

---

by: rdelbov @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 22:32:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It is not exactly this

I would tell what new VRA districts are ok when that help to the minorities get not under the hands of the republicans from Arizona, as example, because they work actively against the hispanic minority in the state legislature. In this type of cases the VRA protection is necessary. Do you imagine what would do people like J Brewer with the two latino districts of Arizona?

I'm not a latino, I have basque origin, like J Garamendi (CA-10), but surely I'm one of bests speaking spanish in SSP, if not the best. And I feel would be not necessary to do that. Colorado is an example electing latino democrats for the highest level offices.

---

by: abgin @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 23:48:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I am assuming

Gov Sandoval and Martinez in NM & NV will look after the interest of hispanic voters in those two states. They are after all hispanics. I note that in all the western states with large hispanic populations the democrats declined to nominate any hispanics for vacant Gov offices or senate seats.  That's a side issue but who is looking after whose interests?

I am not  too aware of all the stuff going on in AZ but Gov & Brewer and McCain won  nearly 30% of the hispanic vote last year.  That's about average for GOP candidates in AZ so I don't see them as being upset with Brewer or the GOP.  

I understand your idea is that they would benefit them  more by having a democrat of any stripe  then any GOP candidate. If that meant  dividing  hispanic & AA voters in all fifty states and basically eliminating most minority majority seats would be that okay?  If you drew three 40% AA seats in AL they would likely elect three white democrats.  Is that better then the current arrangement?  

---

by: rdelbov @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 03:04:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The difference between CO and the South

is that racial voting is much less polarized in CO than the South. Hispanic candidates in CO can win in ~70% white districts like the 3rd on my map (which could very well elect a Hispanic representative like Salazar or House Minority Leader Sal Pace of Pueblo if Perlmutter wasn't already there). In most of the South, OTOH, if AA's do not make up a majority in a district, then it is very unlikely that district will ever elect an AA representative. Legally, w/r/t the VRA, that doesn't matter. But it definitely changes the political calculus for minority legislators in CO vs. in the south, and makes the Hispanic legislators in CO somewhat less concerned with guaranteeing a majority- or plurality- Hispanic seat than AA legislators in the south are with securing majority- AA seats.  

Male, VA-08

---

by: drobertson @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 21:32:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It is obvious

The VRA works well in the places where the majorities are hostile toward the minorities.

---

by: abgin @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 22:13:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Voters in the south are not hostile towards

minorities.  They elected an AA congressman in SC & FL plus an hispanic senator from one of those states.

Its all about party/ideology and not about race.

That's my reason I believe the justices have scaled back this racial gerrymandering stuff because its not about race its about party.  

The Salazars atrracted a lot of white votes in their runs and I might add they were considered moderate for CO.

Martinez & Sandoval won the won vote in their Gov races.  

Its not about race anymore with the voting rights act but party.  The Justices will allow force the drawing of "gerrymandered minority majority seats".  If you have to split a county or two to get it done its a gerrymander.

Mind you if bodies want to draw seats they can have it.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 22:57:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It is shameless

I agree. And I would love to see a world in which redistricting is done non-politically with strong respect for CoIs, as would everyone else here.

But until then, we have to accept that people will see the law different ways and seek to use it to their own advantage. I'm not advocating anything (or at least I don't think I am); I'm only trying to provide a perspective on interpretation that most people here might not be eager to see, but that people on the other side would see instantly.

I'm biased, but I put that right up front so you know where I'm comng from.

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

---

by: shamlet @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 03:08:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I would be game to do

a Michigan like don't split any cities or counties unless you have to plan.  Can you do a partisan map?  Yup look at it. Yet the map is not too outrageous.  

The problem is I would prefer not to do it as a federal law but states are slow to adopt this type plan.

---

by: rdelbov @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 03:13:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I emphasize it because you are doing it as openly republican

But I'm sure here they are more republicans what do the same here, in fact, despite find some reasons for hide his/her republican leaning and his/her bias.

---

by: abgin @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 09:25:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I love it!

I wish I had thought of that.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12

---

by: duffman @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 03:42:38 AM UTC

Where does the split in Denver happen?

Do you have any idea where in town you've drawn the lines through? I only ask because a map like this could mean 3 Denver Dems go to Congress (in fact, it'd make it quite likely), but could make it so DeGette isn't one of them.

I'm from there, but don't know the map well enough to figure out where the split is occurring. Anyone?

24, SSP Gay Caucus Policy Committee Chair, Western Democrat; CO-05 (home), CA-14 (law school)

---

by: Kretzy @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 16:53:42 PM UTC

Interesting consequences from the VRA map

(I know it wouldn't happen, but a good thought experiment)

First, a Pueblo/JeffCo battle for the new C-shaped district. I'd be that Rep. Pace (minority leader) and possibly Pueblo DA Bill Theibault would run for that seat, as would probably a termed-out state rep/sen from the West burbs. The interests of these two population centers really don't overlap, so it'd be a very interesting primary.

In the green district, Rep. Tipton and Rep. Gardner would be thrown together. Grand Junction is the only population center, but that district would be almost 70% rural, and Gardner plays well in those areas. It'd guarantee Salazar isn't coming back to Congress.

Yellow: Lamborn stays safe, and can remain invisible.

Red: Boulder + Ft. Collins + Greeley. Would probably be designed for Markey to win, but would be where Polis lives, and his gobs of money probably ensure that this remains a Boulder-centric district for a while. Would join the 3 major colleges in the state, though, with CSU in Ft. Collins, CU in Boulder, and UNC in Greeley.

Green/Blue/Gray:

DeGette would run in one of these, I'd bet, but I'm not sure which (probably Gray).

Blue would probably be a minority Dem, I'd bet Denver City Councilwoman Paula Sandoval, Sen. Lucia Guzman, or Rep. Ed Casso. Casso definitely wants to move up, and is very young, so that'd be an interesting primary.

Green is sort of burbs-ish, and the front-runner would probably be one of the inner Jeff Co reps or Southern Arapahoe reps. I'm really not sure who'd be favored in something like this.

Another thing to notice is Coffman becomes district-less.


24, SSP Gay Caucus Policy Committee Chair, Western Democrat; CO-05 (home), CA-14 (law school)

---

by: Kretzy @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 17:08:40 PM UTC

I know the University of Northern Colorado is in Greeley

But UNC is in Chapel Hill.

:)

---

by: emilysdad @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 17:20:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

About Salazar

If he did want to come back to congress, he lives in the new C-shaped 3rd district. He could easily run again, and I would bet that he could get the support of the Pueblo area while Perlmutter would get the support of the suburbs. The deciding area in the primary would probably be the ski counties, which I suspect would go for Perlmutter because he seems like the kind of guy that would have more appeal to affluent white liberals than Salazar.  

Male, VA-08

---

by: drobertson @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 22:01:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Though a district with a solid Hispanic population

This is probably a district too liberal to elect Salazar. Perlmutter v. Pace would be interesting, and Perlmutter might prevail, but he'd be holding a lot of new turf.  

24, SSP Gay Caucus Policy Committee Chair, Western Democrat; CO-05 (home), CA-14 (law school)

---

by: Kretzy @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 04:49:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Your CO-06

borders New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, Utah, and, with touch-point contiguity, Arizona.

I assume that would be more than any other district.

---

by: emilysdad @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 23:14:05 PM UTC

The most I can see in any other state is 5

NV-02: Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Oregon, California
NM-03: Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Utah (touch-point), Arizona
Those were the two biggest previously, I think.

Male, VA-08

---

by: drobertson @ Wed Jan 26, 2011 at 23:37:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Of seats that aren't at-large, yes

This CO-06 also borders as many seats as WY-AL and SD-AL.  

24, SSP Gay Caucus Policy Committee Chair, Western Democrat; CO-05 (home), CA-14 (law school)

---

by: Kretzy @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 04:52:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

ID-01

Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia.

Yeah, I know it's not the same.

---

by: emilysdad @ Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 06:37:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]