Nice thinking

Not familiar with AZ, but I like seeing the occasional diary about communities from a demographic but nonpartisan perspective.

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

---

by: Xenocrypt @ Fri Mar 11, 2011 at 03:08:05 AM UTC

interesting

Your "new" district is your AZ6, which went into a slow-growing area, although that's what happened last time when the new districts were Pastor's AZ4 and Schweikert's AZ5. Thoughts on the districts:

AZ1: Swapping out central Pinal for eastern Cochise and some emptyish parts of Maricopa is probably about a wash politically. I think it would still be lean R, although Gosar would probably not be able to hold it indefinitely.

AZ2: Even more of a Republican sink.

AZ3: Also a red sink. Even for Quayle.

AZ4: another uber-red district. Those were already the 3 reddest seats and you made them even more red.

AZ5: blue sink for Pastor.

AZ6: this district would almost certainly send up a Democrat. I could see my old reps Chuck Blanchard, Ken Cheuvront, or Chris Cummiskey (among others) holding this indefinitely.

AZ7: looks like the current AZ5 but without its reddest (north Scottsdale) and bluest (north Tempe) parts. Ahwatukee and south Scottsdale are lean-R areas but I would suspect them to trend blue over time along with the rest of this district. I think Schweikert could hold this in an average year, but maybe not in a good Dem year.

AZ8: Grijalva would be very happy with that district, and I think he would hold it all decade.

AZ9: probably tilt-D or lean-D now. Giffords could hold that indefinitely, although if she moves on a moderate Republican (someone like Jim Kolbe) could win it in a good year.

Overall this map would be very favorable for Dems. It has 3 red seats, 3 blue ones, and 3 purple ones. It would be 5R-4D at most after 2012 if Giffords runs in AZ9, and possibly 3R-6D as Gosar and Schweikert would likely draw strong challengers.    

41, Ind, CA-05

---

by: sacman701 @ Fri Mar 11, 2011 at 04:47:57 AM UTC

Heh, I actually like it

Probably a little bit too pro-Dem, but it's quite good from a Communities of Interest point of view.

AZ-01 I've recently decided that despite the good intentions of creating a rural seat, this district is going to be a hopeless mess no matter what anyone does. This is probably pretty close to as good as it gets, though I'm not sure why quintessential exburb Anthem from Maricopa County is there.

AZ-03 Heh, Ben Quayle lives in your AZ-06 and David Schweikert lives here. The once-countywide-elected and generally competent but quite conservative Schweikert would (probably) wreck Quayle in a primary (unless he got tea-bagged to death).

AZ-06 looks like it was personally drawn from Kyrsten Sinema, who is sort of the prototypical Arizona white liberal. I do really get the appeal of the well-educated, urban, "Creative Class" sort of district. TX-25 is actually a really good comparison, though swap the rural counties with a few stubbornly light red parts of a central Phoenix. Should clock in somewhere like 56 or 57% Obama.

AZ-07 & AZ-04 Actually this map shows quite careful attention to dividing the purple parts of the East Valley from the red ones. As things stand now, your AZ-07 leans to the right without the help of Tempe, but it's probably close enough that it's still considered competitive. Obama probably pulled off something in the mid to high forties here.

AZ-08 Yuma County is really Hispanic. It is also votes quite Republican, presumably because Hispanics don't or can't vote (because the parts of the county that are overwhelming Hispanic vote solidly though in small numbers for Democrats, I don't think the puzzle here is that local Hispanics are more likely than the mean to support Republicans). Voter participation rates seem a lot higher in the parts of the West Valley you drew in, so that should more or less compensate for dropping white libs in Tucson, but bear in mind that politically this district is probably mostly treading water. It's hard to do much with Pinal County due to the way the current census block groups are drawn (it will be easier when we have 2010 blocks in the DRA), but it would be cool to somehow get mostly white Maricopa into your 4th and mostly Hispanic towns like Eloy and Coolidge into your 8th.

AZ-09 Definitely got a push to the left due to the inclusion of the rest of Midtown and most of downtown to boot. Obama probably won it now.

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

---

by: Nico @ Fri Mar 11, 2011 at 06:22:01 AM UTC

Re: AZ01, AZ08, Other flaws

The story behind Anthem landing in AZ01 was that I had been futzing with this map for four weeks, finally got annoyed with the limitations of the block groups that limited my ability to grab more rural territory for the 1st out of Pinal and cut a map that looked like it was roughly correct, knowing that I may have grabbed a Phoenix exurb or two by accident. Anyways, without the actual census numbers, its more a concept map than anything else.

As for AZ08, the idea is that the Latino vote will increase over time and move this stronger into the D column by the end of the decade.

There are three points of contention I actually have with my own map (though my total first hand experience with Arizona is one 11 hour layover in the middle of the night at Sky Harbor, so you can tell me how valid they are):

1) I feel that it gives too much weight to the East Valley while.....
2) There is actually a pretty solid case for a new district in the West Valley, the territory for which is split to make the Tempe-Phoenix Center 6th a reality and to shore up AZ08 as a second minority friendly seat.
3) The Anthem problem with AZ01, as mentioned.

So in terms of who each district would send in something resembling a neutral year:

AZ01: Gosar (R)
AZ02: Franks (R) or successor GOPer
AZ03: Schewikert (R)
AZ04: GOPer (I almost dread to think what sort of moonbat this district might throw on a plane to DC)
AZ05: Pastor (D)
AZ06: White Liberal (D)
AZ07: ???
AZ08: Grijalva (D)
AZ09: Giffords (D)

---

by: displacedyankdem @ Fri Mar 11, 2011 at 07:04:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

New district

There's a reasonable argument for just plopping it down like you did in the middle of Maricopa County and having every other district move outward from there, just because the new growth is split between the 2nd, 6th, and to a lesser extent the 7th (mostly in the Maricopa and the Pinal portions). Some people have proposed an exburban East Valley-exburban West Valley-Pinal bridge sort of district, which isn't bad from a communities of interest point of view, but probably not quite as good as what you ultimately propose. For one thing, it would be really hard to drive straight from one end of that district to the other, which is expected in say AZ-01, but kind of silly in a place as (comparatively) dense as Phoenix metro.

That might have been the first time anyone ever described Phoenix metro as dense...

Anyway, I guess a full blown West-Valley based AZ-09 is possible, and it probably could be sort of swingy, because it would almost certainly have to take in Avondale from AZ-07 and southern Glendale and maybe even the West End of Phoenix from AZ-04 in order to be at all justified. I've always thought that such a district was a lot more likely in the alternate universe where Arizona got ten seats than reality. The East Valley is a little bit bigger and has the added advantage of having a much strong claim that part or most of Pinal County is in its community of interest than the West Valley does (for one thing, it's much easier to drive to San Tan Heights, Apache Junction and even Casa Grande from the East Valley than from the West Valley).

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

---

by: Nico @ Sat Mar 12, 2011 at 03:34:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for posting this map-it could happen

Lets review this map and the old map for VRA implications.

1. The old map clearly had two seats that were clearly racial gerrymanders.  The splitting of the two indian reservations between CD1 & CD2.  Its clearly a racial decision but not one that I agree with.  Its a political decision to divide the two tribes up by race and it passes VRA muster.  The 7th district is only clearly a seat that is a racial gerrymander.  The part of Maricopa & Pinal  counties was designed to exclude white voters now in CD2 & CD6.  The same for Santa Cruz & Pima county as lines were drawn to carefully put white voters in CD8. I have no problem with this political decision as its a way to get the AZ delegation to reflect the population of the state.  This move was not required under Shaw but is certainly a valid political interest to have two hispanic congressman from AZ.

2. The current map continues the same brand of racial splits in Pima, Yuma and Maricopa counties. CD8 is clearly gerrymandered to keep a majority  minority seat for Congressman G.  For the reasons stated above I think that's totally okay.  This type of action is not required under VRA but is allowed.  As I said I think its a noble political goal to have the congressional representation of a state reflect its population.

I am not sure Maricopa will end up like this after the map is drawn.  This is clearly a map that is designed to stack and pack repulblicans in several seats in an effort to create competitive seats.  Not sure it will happen but who knows.  

---

by: rdelbov @ Fri Mar 11, 2011 at 15:22:59 PM UTC

This is a very good map

I could see something like this coming to pass. Saddlebrooke will be kept in the same district as northern Pima county, so your district 9. Also, I'd be surprised to see the commission split Sierra Vista into two seperate districts. I agree with Nico that your district 9 would elect Kyrsten Sinema. She's been making noises about running and may be able to get a clear path in the primary.

Although the commission has an independent chair who gave to now Dem state chair Andrei Cherney in his run for state treasurer and Emily's List, it also has a plant from Jesse Kelly (last seen narrowly losing to Giffords in November). While a map like this is certainly possible, the lines through Tucson may become a topic of much discussion on the commission.

---

by: azpoljunkie @ Sat Mar 12, 2011 at 07:39:29 AM UTC