| I am as partisan a Democrat as most people on this website. As an Illinoisan, I am dismayed that my state elected five freshmen Republicans last fall but very grateful (for a whole lot of other reasons besides redistricting) that Governor Quinn just managed to hold on. Otherwise we would be looking at another "incumbent protection" map, which in a state that just elected five freshmen GOP congressmen last fall, would be tantamount to a GOP gerrymander.
Various would-be mappers such as Silverspring have proposed 14-4 maps that would make Delay and Phil Burton proud. But many of these maps go by Obama 2008 data, which is a fundamentally flawed data set to be basing districts on in my very educated opinion. On the surface maps provided by such places as usaelection.org, you can see counties like Kendall and Grundy and Stephenson and McHenry (just to name a few) that wound up in Obama's column in 2008. No seasoned Democratic politician in Illinois would ever call these counties that are Democratic by any means. Perhaps as suburban/exurban areas of McHenry and Kendall start to fill up and become more swingy, those counties might change.
This diary, however, focuses on a slightly different problem with the Obama 2008 data when compared against Kerry 2004 downstate (where it models pretty accurately - I understand the concerns people have about Cook and Dupage which may be a bit bluer now in 2011 but that trend is not noticeable anywhere outside of Chicagoland). The problem is this: several of the downstate cities that mappers such as myself and Silver Spring and others count on to create as many Democratic-leaning districts as we can, aren't really all that blue to begin with. In other cases, such as Decatur and Urbana-Champaign, they are quite blue, but turnout is a problem. Follow me across the jump where I demonstrate this using a new district I have been creating in most of my maps - a new 13th which disappears in Chicagoland and reappears as a vacant downstate cities seat. |
On first glance this district ought to be safely Democratic, even in 2004. It isn't entirely so. Believe it or not, but Bush got 49% of the vote in this district (and the narrow tendrils connecting the various cities together only amount to about 30k residents so that isn't the problem so much). The district is good enough for my standards, though, because Obama did get 59%. By Cook PVI it is a D+4, perhaps not completely safe from a meltdown of 2010 proportions but most Republicans cannot win in districts any more Democratic than this, and other than Tim Johnson, there is no sitting Republican congressman from this area of the state who could have cross-over appeal. Even then, Tim Johnson is not a Mark Kirk, and it would take a Mark Kirk for the GOP to win this seat. So I think it is reasonably safe Team Blue, probably as safe as can be drawn in fact.
In most other parts of the country, a 51% Kerry, 59% Obama seat would be considered safely Democratic. But again, pay attention to that swing. At 8% it is a bit larger than nationwide if not as extreme as the 10-12% swings found everywhere in Chicagoland. When one looks at the cities, you see what I am discussing (with the order of the numbers being Dem-Rep):
Peoria: 28,542-18,536 in 2008; 24,795-22,398 in 2004
Danville: about 8,000 - about 4,500 in 2008; about 7,500-about 5,000 in 2004 (Does anybody know where I can find Danville or Vermillion precinct numbers; their elections website is among the most unhelpful I have ever experienced?) I calculated this by assuming, for the sake of argument, that the out-city areas of Vermillion were equally as red as the out-city areas of Champaign County next door but I could be slightly off in either direction.
Champaign-Urbana: 32,618-13,408 in 2008; 28,814-17,222 in 2004
Bloomington: 17,578-15,167 in 2008; 13,628-17,154 in 2004
Normal: 12,257-9,197 in 2008; 9,555-10,570 in 2004
Springfield: 32,463-24,019 in 2008; 24,650-28,971 in 2004
I am progressing slower than normal with my maps because it has occurred to me that there are really three scenarios that have to be taken into consideration. Scenario A: a tactically conservative but aggressive in every other sense map that would lock down 13 Kerry districts (Rockford going together with Rock Island; the 14th going into downtown Joliet, etc.). Scenario B: a more risky 12-4-2 map that would put Joliet in a swing seat as well as Melissa Bean in another one in the north part of Chicagoland. Scenario C finally would aim for a 12-5-1 which would shore up Melissa Bean while pushing a Kane seat into Rockford, which would then make the downstate cities seat very swingish (voted for Bush 53-47 then flipped to Obama 55-45).
Personally I would opt for Scenario A if I were drawing the map and not try to do a 14-4. Unfortunately with Citizens United, the money game is even more unstacked in our disfavor. Our ticket should get a bump with Obama on the top of the ticket, but then what about the remaining four elections in the decade-long period that any map would be operative? Finally, another reason to be aggressive when possible but tactically conservative, drawing maps more according to Kerry or 2010 congressional data rather than Obama: Illinois is notorious for split-ticket voters. In the weeds work I have been doing up in Chicago suburbia, I cannot tell you how often a precinct that voted 60-40 for Obama voted also in the same election for Biggert or Roskam. And that was in 2008! Chicago suburbia is full of independents and moderates.
That being said, it is possible to draw 13 Kerry seats to only 5 Bush seats, and if 13-5 were achieved in 2012, that would still mean -6 GOP, +5 Dem. That is nothing to snuff at. |
