Today's the last day of Census data releases, meaning we have the complete set of all 50 states now. The Census Bureau released some data summarizing the entire nation, including what you'd think was the single most important bit of all, considering the way they hyped the announcement: the new population center of the U.S., still in south-central Missouri, but moving 30 miles to the southwest, now near Plato, MO. Perhaps more interestingly, they summarized the country's demographic change as a whole: that starts with the nation's Hispanic population crossing the 50 million mark, now up to almost 17% of the nation's population. Hispanics and Asians both grew at a 43% rate, and people checking "2 or more" races rose at a 32% rate. The non-Hispanic white share of the population fell from 69% to 64%. They also found a country that's more urban than ever before, with 84% of the country living in metropolitan areas now.
I know you're all champing at the bit to find out what happens in Maine, but there's this other state called "New... Something" that we should probably get through first. New York is one of only two states to lose two seats, from 29 down to 27. (Ohio was the other one.) New York's new target is 717,707, up from about 654K in 2000. Thanks to a few hundred votes in a couple of state Senate races that tipped that chamber's balance, the GOP managed to hold on to one leg of the redistricting trifecta, meaning that instead of a shot at a 26-1 Dem map, there's probably just going to be a shared-pain map instead with a GOP loss upstate and a Dem loss in the NYC metro area. That's despite the fact that New York City itself actually grew a bit, to 8.175 million, still by far the nation's largest city. (There are moves afoot toward an independent redistricting commission, but this doesn't seem likely to happen.)
In general, the heaviest losses were in the western part of Upstate, with the state's two biggest losers the Dem-held 27th (Buffalo) and 28th (Rochester). On the other hand, losses also popped up rather patchily in parts of the outer boroughs (especially the 11th in the black parts of Brooklyn... without much seniority, Yvette Clarke may wind up with the shortest straw among the NYC delegation) and Long Island (Peter King's 3rd... which would be a prime target for the 2nd seat to evaporate, if only the Dems controlled the trifecta here). The big gainers were both urban (Jerry Nadler's 8th, probably fueled not so much by growth in Manhattan as among Orthodox families in Borough Park in Brooklyn) and exurban (Nan Hayworth's 19th, at the outermost reaches of the NYC metro area).
While none of the districts in New York seem to be undergoing the kind of rapid demographic transformation that threatens the red/blue balance in any place like we've seen in Texas or California, a few districts are worth looking at just as an indicator of what an interesting tapestry New York City is. Take the 5th for instance (another possibility for wipeout, given its strange position straddling Nassau County and Queens, and Gary Ackerman's non-entity-ness): it's moved from 44% non-Hispanic white, 5% non-Hispanic black, 24% non-Hispanic Asian, and 24% Hispanic, to 36% white, 4% black, 33% Asian, and 26% Hispanic, close to an Asian-plurality, thanks to growth in the Asian community in Flushing. A few districts in New York City are getting whiter, thanks to hipsters and gentrifiers: the 11th moved from 21% white and 58% black to 26% white and 53% black, while the 12th moved from 23% white and 49% Hispanic to 27% white and 45% Hispanic. The Harlem-based 15th went from 16% white, 30% black, and 48% Hispanic, to 21% white, 26% black, and 46% Hispanic, while the remarkably complex, Queens-based 7th went the other direction, from 28% white, 16% black, 13% Asian, and 40% Hispanic to 21% white, 16% black, 16% Asian, and 44% Hispanic.
District
Rep.
Population
Deviation
NY-01
Bishop (D)
705,559
(12,148)
NY-02
Israel (D)
679,893
(37,814)
NY-03
King (R)
645,508
(72,199)
NY-04
McCarthy (D)
663,407
(54,300)
NY-05
Ackerman (D)
670,130
(47,577)
NY-06
Meeks (D)
651,764
(65,943)
NY-07
Crowley (D)
667,632
(50,075)
NY-08
Nadler (D)
713,512
(4,195)
NY-09
Weiner (D)
660,306
(57,401)
NY-10
Towns (D)
677,721
(39,986)
NY-11
Clarke (D)
632,408
(85,299)
NY-12
Velazquez (D)
672,358
(45,349)
NY-13
Grimm (R)
686,525
(31,182)
NY-14
Maloney (D)
652,681
(65,026)
NY-15
Rangel (D)
639,873
(77,834)
NY-16
Serrano (D)
693,819
(23,888)
NY-17
Engel (D)
678,558
(39,149)
NY-18
Lowey (D)
674,825
(42,882)
NY-19
Hayworth (R)
699,959
(17,748)
NY-20
Gibson (R)
683,198
(34,509)
NY-21
Tonko (D)
679,193
(38,514)
NY-22
Hinchey (D)
679,297
(38,410)
NY-23
Owens (D)
664,245
(53,462)
NY-24
Hanna (R)
657,222
(60,485)
NY-25
Buerkle (R)
668,869
(48,838)
NY-26
Vacant
674,804
(42,903)
NY-27
Higgins (D)
629,271
(88,436)
NY-28
Slaughter (D)
611,838
(105,869)
NY-29
Reed (R)
663,727
(53,980)
Total:
19,378,102
Now for the maine event! (Rim shot.) Maine's a lot like Rhode Island and New Hampshire in that the long-standing boundary between its two districts rarely seems to budge much, and this year won't be any different. Maine's target is 664,181, up from 637K in 2000. The disparity of a little more than 4,000 people means things won't change much; the Republicans control the redistricting process this year but there's not a lot of fertile material here for them to try to make swingy ME-02 much redder.
• HI-Sen: I'm not sure where these rumors started - or if they're just tradmed speculation - but Gov. Neil Abercrombie says he hasn't tried to get retiring Sen. Dan Akaka to resign early in order to appoint a replacement (who could then run for a full term next year as an incumbent). Count me among those who thinks former Gov. Linda Lingle isn't as intimidating in real life as she might seem on paper - particularly given the fact that Barack Obama is running for re-election, and that her exit poll approvals in 2010 were a sucky 41-56. So I'm not convinced there'd even really be any point in trying to push an Akaka resignation.
• ME-Sen: As we wait for the Great Teabagger Hope to deliver our dreams, the Hotline has word of another possible challenger to Sen. Olympia Snowe: former state legislator Carol Weston, who is now the state director of the Maine branch of the David Koch front group Americans for Prosperity. That could mean access to serious resources - something Weston acknowledges is a key factor in deciding on a run. Anyhow, she's not ruling out a run, but claims she isn't really considering it yet. But she also says that as part of her job with AfP, she sometimes has to "reign in" Snowe - pretty denigrating words, if you ask me!
• MI-Sen: We've mentioned him before, but now he's making it official: Former juvenile court judge and all-around social conservative Randy Hekman says he'll seek the GOP line to challenge Debbie Stabenow. Hekman sounds decidedly Some Dude-level, though.
• NV-Sen: This time, the joke comes pre-written. The ultra-wealthy Sue Lowden still has hundreds of thousands in campaign debts and has now been sued by her former polling company, Denver-based Vitale & Associates, for unpaid bills. The pollster's attorney said Lowden is "probably driving around in her Bentley with a load of chickens in the back as barter to settle her campaign debts."
• PA-Sen: Pretty sweet re-elects for Bob Casey (D) in this new Muhlenberg College poll of registered voters: 48% say yes, 24% no, and 25% are unsure. Against Generic R, Casey pulls 41 to 27, but Muhlenberg also allowed people to say "it depends on the candidate" (not sure that's such a helpful choice), which scored 18. It's not entirely clear what the sample looked like, though, since the Mule only gives the breakdowns for their larger "all adults" sample (36D, 36R, 11I). In 2008, it was 44D, 37R, 18I.
• RI-Sen, RI-01: The head of the Rhode Island state police, Brendan Doherty, just unexpectedly announced that he would resign in April, and that's leading to talk he might be considering a run for office as a Republican. Though Doherty had originally been appointed by Republican Gov. Don Carcieri, he was re-appointed only last week by the new governor, Lincoln Chafee. Anyhow, Doherty supposedly is choosing between a challenge to Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse or to freshman Rep. David Cicilline in the first district. He says he'll announce his plans at the end of May.
• VA-Sen, VA-11: Rep. Gerry Connolly (D) is opting out of a Senate run, saying instead he'll seek re-election to a third term in the House. Like just about everyone else, he also declared that he wants to see Tim Kaine run. Speaking of which, Sen. Mark Warner said on the teevee this weekend that he thinks the odds of Kaine jumping in were "slim" but "are getting a lot better right now." I have no idea if Warner has any special insight, or if maybe he's just trying to pull a reverse-Inouye here (i.e., goad someone into running).
• NV-Gov: Jon Ralston calls it "one of the most brazen schemes in Nevada history" (not just electoral history! and this is Nevada!), while Rory Reid says everything he did was "fully disclosed and complied with the law." Ralston describes this "scheme" as the formation of "91 shell political action committees that were used to funnel three quarters of a million dollars into his campaign." Ralston's had wall-to-wall coverage at his site. Among other things, Reid's legal advisor wrote a letter to the campaign saying he thought the use of these PACs was legal - and, in a point that Ralston is seriously disputing, also said he got sign-off from the Secretary of State. I don't really think Reid had much of a future in NV politics anyway, but if Ralston's reading of the situation is right, this could spell a lot of trouble for him. If not, then it's just some sketchy politics-as-usual. Even Ralston himself acknowledges that "the point here is less whether it actually was legal... but whether it should be."
• CA-36: Finally some endorsements for Debra Bowen: She just announced the backing of state Sens. Alan Lowenthal and Fran Pavley, state Rep. Betsy Butler, and former state Sen. Sheila Kuehl.
• MN-08: This is from a couple of weeks ago, but still relevant: Duluth-area state Sen. Roger Reinert says he won't challenge freshman GOPer Chip Cravaack next year, adding his name to the list of Dems who have declined to run. Others who have said no: Duluth Mayor Don Ness; former state House Majority Leader Tony Sertich; state Rep. Tom Rukavina; and state Senate Minority Leader Tom Bakk (whom we'd previously mentioned). Man, that's a lot of dudes named Tom! (UPDATE: Just two - it's Tony, not Tom, Sertich.) That's most of the heaviest hitters, but another possible candidate is Duluth City Councilman Jeff Anderson, who told FOX 21 that he is "very interested" (their words) in the race.
• Milwaukee Co. Exec.: Huh - I'd managed to forget that Scott Walker didn't just emerge fully-formed out of a rent in David Koch's skull on January 1st, 2011. Until not that long ago, he was the Milwaukee County Executive, which means that his old seat is up in a special election next month. It should come as no surprise that Walker's extremely unpopular attempts at union busting have become the issue in the race, and Republican state Rep. Jeff Stone is suffering badly for it. Stone voted for Walker's budget bill, but now says he "would have preferred to leave the collective bargaining intact" - even though, as TPM notes, he voted against every Democratic amendment that would have done exactly that. Stone's nominally independent but really Democratic opponent, philanthropist Chris Abele, has been hammering him on this front. The April 5th vote is actually a run-off; last month, Stone took 43% while Abele scored 25%, splitting the Democratic vote with the remaining candidates (all of whom were on the lefty side of the equation).
• PA-AG: Columnist Jan Ting, who took 29% against Tom Carper in DE-Sen in 2006 but later left the GOP, says he has heard that former Rep. Patrick Murphy is considering a run for Pennsylvania Attorney General. A source also informs me that this is true. Note that most of PA's statewide positions other than governor are up in 2012, so this race would be coming on soon. Note, too, that it will be an open seat: Newly-elected Gov. Tom Corbett was himself AG, and he appointed Pittsburgh-area prosecutor Linda Kelly to take his place. Kelly, however, has said she won't run for the post next year.
• Ohio Ballot: Though it's gotten less attention than the fight in Wisconsin, Ohio is on the verge of passing legislation which strip collective bargaining rights from public workers. TPM reports that Ohio Dems are planning to put the law, known as SB 5, on the ballot (it'd take about 230,000 signatures), something which could happen either this November or next. This could wind up being a truly epic fight - though I'm also reminded of the last time Ohio Dems put up some lefty ballot measures in an odd-numbered year, and that didn't turn out so well. (The 2005 effort was called Reform Ohio Now, and you can read all about it in the SSP Deep Archives.) Still, I think our chances would be a lot better this time.
• KS Redistricting: In 2002, state lawmakers split the rather blue Douglas County (home to the city of Lawrence) between two congressional districts, the 2nd and 3rd. Now, though, thanks to growth in Johnson County, the third has to shed population (as we informed you last week), and one Democratic legislator is suggesting that Douglas could be reunited in a single CD. This seems unlikely, though, as it's manifestly in the Republican Party's interest to keep Lawrence cracked.
• NE Redistricting: There's a similar story playing out in neighboring Nebraska, where the now-famous 2nd CD (which gave Barack Obama a very narrow win - and a single electoral vote) also has to reduce its population. Light-blue Douglas County (no, I'm not losing it - different county, different state, same name as above) is currently entirely within the borders of NE-02, but it could potentially get cracked. The linked article discusses a number of different possible scenarios for the whole state, and even has some hypothetical maps.
• NJ Redistricting: No surprise here: Democrats and Republicans couldn't agree on a new map for New Jersey's state legislative districts, so the Chief Judge of the Supreme Court, Stuart Rabner, appointed Rutgers Prof. Alan Rosenthal as tiebreaker (click here for a detailed profile). That wasn't a surprise, either, as the 78-year-old Rosenthal performed the same duties during the last two rounds of redistricting for the U.S. House. Rosenthal is a Democrat but has a very non-partisan reputation. Last time, Democrats convinced the appointed tiebreaker, Larry Bartels, that their proposed gerrymander would improve minority representation. A similar outcome is probably not so likely this time.
• OR Redistricting: As you can see from all the above links, now that redistricting data has been released, we're starting to see a lot more redistricting-related stories with a little more meat to them. This piece outlines the issues facing Oregon and also explains some of the deadlines involved. If lawmakers don't enact a state lege map by July 1 (or the governor vetoes it), then the task falls to Secretary of State Kate Brown, a Democrat. This is typically what's happened in the past, though apparently there's some hope that the evenly-divided state House (with its unusual dual Speakerships) will produce something both sides can agree on. Note that there is no similar deadline for congressional redistricting.
• PA Redistricting: Pennsylvania's congressional Republicans are headed to the state capital of Harrisburg this week, to discuss how best to gerrymander their map with their state legislative colleagues. Given that the GOP has absolute control over the redistricting process in PA, Democrats are going to get pretty fucked here, and PoliticsPA has a rundown of several possible scenarios that Republicans are supposedly considering.
• New York: An issue which first came up nationwide last cycle is still percolating in New York. As we explained in September 2009, a new federal law (the MOVE Act) requires that absentee ballots be mailed to all overseas and military voters at least 45 days before the general election. That's a problem in states with late primaries, like New York, where results can't be certified and ballots can't be printed in time to meet this deadline. A couple of states (I think just Vermont and Minnesota) moved their primaries up a bit to aide compliance, but others, like NY, had to get waivers from the Department of Justice that allowed them to send out ballots later. Despite getting such a waiver, many boards of election (including NYC's) still failed to comply with even the later deadline - and now the DoJ (which had to sue NY last year) is unhappy with the state's lack of further efforts to remedy these problems. An association of local election commissioners, at a meeting in January, voted to ask the state legislature to move the primary to June to avoid these issues altogether.
• Dave's Redistricting App: Dave has more data and more fixes, so that you can get your fix of data.
This diary presents a theoretical Republican gerrymander of New York (27 representatives) that should, in the normal course of events, yield a 16D-11R delegation. Exactly how Republican a seat needs to be to be safe is a matter for debate, but in none of the projected Republican seats did Obama receive more than 47% of the vote which I feel should be safe most of the time. This map make makes quite a bit of use of water contiguity both around Long Island and Lake Ontario, however there is no touch point contiguity. Population deviations are all less than 1000 (within 0.15%).
Districts are numbered in reverse order to the current system, low numbered districts are upstate and high numbered are downstate.
NY-1 (Blue): More or less similar to the current 28th including the most Democratic parts of Buffalo, Niagara Falls, and the western Democratic parts of Rochester. Uses water contiguity on Lake Ontario instead of following the coastline which helps to push the PVI a little more Democratic. O 71% M 27%
NY-2 (Green): Reasonably similar to the current 26th in that it includes parts of the Buffalo and Rochester suburbs and the areas in between. O 47% M 51%
NY-3 (Dark Magenta): At this point upstate New York starts to take departures from reality and no longer resembles the current districts. The western parts of the southern tier, the south Buffalo suburbs, and wraps around Rochester to take in the eastern suburbs. O 47% M 52%
NY-4 (Red): Eastern and southern democratic leaning areas of Rochester, water contiguity to Oswego and a thin strip to metro Syracuse, tendrils to both Utica and Ithaca. O 64% M 35%
NY-5 (Gold): The remainder of the southern tier, the territory between Syracuse (including its western suburbs) and Rochester, wraps around to southern Syracuse avoiding Ithaca. O 47% M 51%
NY-6 (Teal): Northern Syracuse, northern Utica, Rome, north along the Lake Ontario coastline before turning east and then south, terminating short of Albany. O 47% M 52%
NY-7 (Dark Grey): The Democratic leaning northernmost counties, a narrow strip running down the eastern state line, Saratoga Springs, Schenectady, and Albany. O 62% M 36%
NY-8 (Slate Blue): Otsego County centred, with arms running off in every direction sucking in Republican leaning districts. O 47% M 51%
NY-9 (Cyan): Both the east and west state lines with convoluted lines grabbing the most Republican parts of Rockford County O 46% M 52%
NY-10 (Deep Pink): Binghampton, Middletown, Peekskill, Newburgh, Poughkeepsie, Kingston, and the land connecting them. O 60% M 39%
NY-11 (Chartreuse): The Democratic parts of Rockland and parts of Westchester, down the Hudson river coastline a little. O 66% M 33%
NY-12 (Cornflower Blue): More of Democratic Westchester, including New Rochelle and Mount Vernon, plus some of the northern Bronx. O 85% M 14%
NY-13 (Dark Salmon): Southern Bronx, much like the current 16th. O 93% M 7%
NY-14 (Olive): Northern Manhattan, much like the current 15th. O 92% M 7%
NY-15 (Dark Orange): Southern Manhattan. O 82% M 17%
NY-16 (Lime): Little bits of Kings, Queens, the Bronx, and Manhattan. O 79% M 20%
NY-17 (Dark Slate Blue): Mostly Queens. O 81% M 19%
NY-18 (Yellow): North-eastern Kings. O 95% M 5%
NY-19 (Yellow Green): North-western Kings and the northern shore of Staten Island. O 90% M 9%
NY-20 (Pink): South-western Kings and Staten Island minus its north shore. O 47% M 53%
NY-21 (Maroon): South Eastern Kings, and connected by water contiguity, the entire south coast of Long Island from Long Beach to Montauk.
O 46% M 53%
NY-22 (Sienna): Mostly Queens. O 71% M 29%
NY-23 (Aquamarine): Horrendously tortuous district picking up everything republican in southern Westchester, Bronx County, Queens, and Nassau and using repeated water contiguity over Eastchester Bay and the Long Island Sound to do it. O 47% M 52%
NY-24 (Indigo): Republican areas north of Jamaica bay in Queens, as well as southern Nassau, and a little south-western Suffolk. O 47% M 52%
NY-25 (Pale Violet Red): The most Democratic parts of central and southern Queens and Nassau. O 90% M 10%
NY-26 (Grey): The republican parts of Eastern Long Island O 47% M 53%
NY-27 (Spring Green): The Democratic parts of Eastern long island, in four sections, each connected by water contiguity along the Long Island Sound. O 63% M 37%
In a perfect world, with New York losing a seat in the 2010 reapportionment, we could create 28 districts that would, more-or-less, give the Democrats a shot at winning 27 of them, some more easily than others. To do this, I had to ignored political reality, as you will see in the way districts were shaped (e.g. the sole GOP district or Staten Island's bifurcation). As a corollary to ignoring political reality, I also did not attempt to make as many completely safe Dem seats as possible; otherwise, it would have been difficult to create 27 legitimately lean-Dem or better seats. However, I believe I did a fairly good job of creating favorable numbers for New York Democrats, at least in the sense that President Obama only won three of the 27 Democratic districts by less than 10% in 2008.
Note: I actually did this back in November '10 but only now am I posting my efforts. It's possible that updates have occurred to New York's data since then. Also, I'm aware that New York ended up losing two seats in reapportionment, not just one as I originally thought while drawing this up.
After only two years of a slim 32-30 Democratic majority in the New York State Senate, Republicans in this past election barely took back the chamber that they had previously held continuously for more than forty years. People around the country endlessly ask the question: how is it possible that Republicans have a majority of state senators in a state as "blue" as New York?
There is no simple answer to that question. Sufficed it to say, one of the most important factors is gerrymandering. Republicans did a masterful job of redistricting a very favorable map for themselves ten years ago. The current map is littered with Republican senators holding light blue Obama districts all over Long Island (9-0 Republican) and Upstate (21-4). With the great help of Daves Redistricting App 2.0, I set about in the task of redistricting New York's State Senate districts with three main goals in mind: 1.) connect Democratic towns and cities in Long Island, 2.) preserve majority-minority districts in New York City, and 3.) consolidate small cities Upstate. Much of the basis for my analysis comes from jeffmd's excellent post on the State Senate written in 2009 in which he looked at the numbers for the current districts. Inspecting the presidential toplines, it was determined that the cutoff between Republican and Democratic districts is about 58-60% Obama. My map uses that percentage as the benchmark. It would create 10 Democratic districts at over 58% in Upstate New York and another four at over 62% in Long Island. Combined with New York City, this would be more than enough to give Democrats a two-to-one majority in the State Senate. So without further ado, here is what I came up with:
District
Pop. Center
Pop.
Wh%
Bl%
Asn%
Hisp%
Oth%
O%
M%
D
1
Hamptons
318633
66
11
3
17
2
62
38
R
2
Brookhaven
318569
89
2
2
6
1
49
51
R
3
Lindenhurst
318229
89
2
1
6
1
47
53
D
4
Huntington
318189
60
17
3
18
2
63
36
R
5
Smithtown
318668
91
1
3
4
1
46
54
R
6
Massapequa
318525
90
0
3
5
1
44
56
D
7
Great Neck
318243
67
12
8
11
2
64
35
D
8
Hempstead
318681
51
26
3
18
2
69
31
R
9
Garden City
318620
86
1
5
7
1
43
56
D
10
Jamaica
317030
9
55
9
15
12
Black Majority
92
8
D
11
Bayside
317619
60
5
18
13
3
62
37
D
12
Astoria
315924
42
5
13
34
5
78
21
D
13
East Elmhurst
318053
15
9
16
57
3
Hispanic Majority
81
18
D
14
St. Albans
318613
22
55
4
13
5
Black Majority
82
17
D
15
Forest Hills
316488
59
5
15
17
5
63
36
D
16
Flushing
317432
24
3
48
21
4
Asian Plurality
68
31
D
17
Bushwick
317715
13
13
7
60
6
Hispanic Majority
87
12
D
18
Bedford-Stuyvesant
317273
26
51
2
17
4
Black Majority
90
9
D
19
Canarsie
317538
28
52
3
14
3
Black Majority
83
17
D
20
Brooklyn Heights
318797
25
51
3
18
3
Black Majority
93
6
D
21
Prospect
318898
19
51
5
22
3
Black Majority
92
7
D
22
East Flatbush
317890
21
56
6
12
5
Black Majority
85
14
R
23
Homecrest
316816
81
1
11
6
2
33
67
D
24
Brighton Beach
317711
56
6
21
13
3
55
44
D
25
North Shore
318201
49
13
10
24
4
66
34
R
26
Arden Heights
323582
84
1
6
7
1
37
62
D
27
East Village
311559
45
6
27
19
3
84
15
D
28
Upper East Side
309905
83
3
8
5
2
75
24
D
29
Upper West Side
310495
73
5
8
11
2
85
14
D
30
Spanish Harlem
309111
22
23
3
50
2
Hispanic Majority
91
8
D
31
Bedford Park
308720
12
19
5
61
3
Hispanic Majority
90
9
D
32
Harlem
309836
2
61
1
33
2
Black Majority
97
2
D
33
Washington Heights
309056
22
12
4
60
2
Hispanic Majority
90
9
D
34
Soundview
309592
10
28
3
55
3
Hispanic Majority
90
10
D
35
Belmont
308704
21
21
3
53
2
Hispanic Majority
84
16
D
36
Mount Vernon
309493
14
60
2
20
4
Black Majority
92
8
D
37
Harrison
309361
73
7
5
13
2
61
38
D
38
Yonkers
309287
56
14
5
21
3
64
35
D
39
Ossining
309454
76
7
3
13
1
59
40
D
40
Clarkstown
317946
72
10
5
10
2
53
47
R
41
Carmel
321768
88
3
2
6
1
46
53
D
42
Poughkeepsie
317728
71
12
2
13
2
58
41
D
43
Kingston
320216
85
6
1
6
2
60
38
D
44
Troy
317388
86
6
3
3
2
58
40
D
45
Plattsburgh
317612
94
2
1
2
2
58
40
D
46
Albany
315314
84
9
2
3
1
63
35
R
47
Moreau
317511
96
1
1
1
1
49
49
R
48
Rome
317470
91
4
1
3
1
44
54
D
49
Syracuse
317634
80
12
2
3
3
62
36
R
50
Utica
317412
91
4
1
2
1
54
45
R
51
Herkimer
316544
96
1
0
2
1
45
53
R
52
Blooming Grove
319845
90
3
1
4
1
46
52
D
53
Ithaca
318178
87
4
3
3
2
61
38
R
54
Penn Yan
317011
95
2
0
2
2
47
51
R
55
Perinton
316789
92
3
3
2
1
51
47
D
56
Rochester
318289
60
26
3
9
2
72
27
R
57
Corning
317311
95
1
1
1
2
42
56
D
58
Amherst
317906
80
14
2
2
1
61
38
R
59
Hamburg
318084
94
1
1
2
2
49
49
D
60
Buffalo
317816
67
23
1
6
3
69
29
R
61
Batavia
318545
94
2
0
2
1
41
57
R
62
Greece
318537
93
3
1
2
1
46
52
Note, also, that I broke the state into four regions for simplicity: Upstate, Westchester/Bronx/Manhattan, Brooklyn/Queens/Staten Island, and Long Island. Here is another table that breaks down the numbers by region:
Region
County
Population
Districts
(+/-)
316280
(+/-)
Long Island
Suffolk
1516544
Nassau
1349555
2866099
9
0
318323
0.6
New York City
Queens
2320449
Brooklyn
2588844
Staten Island
496246
5405539
17
1
317972
0.5
Manhattan
1646675
Bronx
1415056
Westchester
961565
4023296
13
1
309484
-2.1
Ustate New York
Rockland
301308
Other
7010169
7311477
23
-2
317890
0.5
As you can see from the table, I redraw the map so that NYC gained two seats at the expense of Upstate New York, while Long Island remained the same at 9 districts. The population of each district in each region is very equal with the greatest deviation of -2.1% below the ideal population in the region of Westchester/Bronx/Manhattan. The rest of the seats compensate for this by being about .5% above the ideal. Before discussing the statewide changes that would occur under this redistricting plan, first let me go through the four regions themselves...
During the last redistricting, the Democrats and the Republicans allowed for a split redistricting plan: Dems redraw the Assembly, the GOP drew the Senate, and they both drew the House map. Now, with split control again, I think it would be best to allow the Courts to draw the redistricting map, even if it means Dems lose about twenty Assembly seats--Dems already control about 70% of the vote share!
So, I tried to draw the map as if I were the courts. Sorry if my naming of colors throws you off.
My plan is a fair plan:
I make as many minority-majority seats as I think would be necessary;
No district is designed specifically for any current senator;
County splitting is avoided as much as possible;
Almost all towns are kept together: no joke, there is not a single town outside of Nassau and Suffolk that is split. In Suffolk, Islip is too big, so three precincts are moved to NY-02. In Nassau, some hamlets might be split, but I'm pretty sure there aren't that many that are;
In the City, I tired to respect racial groups;
Upstate, I tried to keep regions together.
To that end, Democrats would surely take the State Senate under this map. I've classified everything from R+1 to D+3 as a swing district. If you give Republicans all swing districts, they'll only muster 25 seats. Kudos to the 2000 GOP, they made one heckuva map. Can you imagine if Dems made a Senate map? They could easily make 45 seats, but that's a different story.
As an ex-New Yorker, I keep my eyes perennially glued to New York politics. It did not shock me terribly that Republicans took back a fair number of upstate New York house seats. There were a lot of 27-1 or 28-0 nonsense maps put on this website last winter that failed to take into account that Republicans in New York often vote Democratic for president when they think the national candidate is too extreme but have no problem voting Republican downballot the rest of the way. This may eventually change, like the voting habits of Dixicrats in the South apparently have, but it will take a while.
What shocked me the most was that it appears that the State Senate, and with it the Democratic trifecta that everyone was counting on last winter, has switched back into narrow GOP control pending the recounts in a few still undeclared State Senate seats. With the lost of the North Buffalo seat to a Republican candidate, it appears our best hopes lay on working to a 31-31 tie. Still, even were the lieutenant governor to cast a tie-breaking vote to organize the chamber for the Democrats, we have to keep in mind that there are quite a few scumbags in the delegation (Carl Krueger always tops the list in my view now that Espada and Montserrate are gone) who are more than willing to cut a deal with Dean Skelos (the GOP leader in the State Senate). I therefore assume the following:
1) The GOP will have a seat at the table with redistricting. Even with the very best scenario of the state senate breakdown of 31-31, it would be very hard to pass a Democratic gerrymander through the state legislature. That's just the reality.
2) It will be an incumbent protection map that discomfits only those chosen to be drawn out.
3) Despite Cuomo's enthusiasm for a commission drawing the maps, it will not be passed in time to affect this round of redistricting and probably won't be passed ever. I can hardly ever see Shelly Silver giving up on drawing the State Assembly lines and that's what it would take for Cuomo's idea to prevail. The Democratic leadership of the State Assembly perennially sold their party brothers and sisters over in the State Senate down the river for decades in going along with all the pro-GOP gerrymandering of the State Senate. I hardly see anything different now.
So this will be an agreement brokered between 3 men in a room, like the state budget or anything in New York State politics. (For those of you not from New York or familiar with this phrase, it refers to the governor, the Assembly Speaker (always Democrat) and the State Senate President (usually historically Republican).
4) In addition to protecting the 4 black VRA districts and the 2 Hispanic VRA districts, a 3rd Hispanic district out of Joe Crowley's currently minority-majority district that is Queens/Bronx will likely have to be passed to pass VRA preclearance. This complicates greatly the map for downstate in a way that 2000 did not. I would imagine that one of the three Queens white Democrats (Ackerman, Weiner, Crowley) gets the axe but expect there to be bitter racial tension over this. Even if the GOP is closed out from redistricting through some act of miracle like the Buffalo state senator deciding to caucus with Democrats and/or Craig Johnson and Suzi Oppenheimer both winning their recounts, all it takes is one or two disgruntled Latino politicians that their constituency isn't getting their "fair share" of congressional districts for them to bolt tactically to the Republicans. If you don't think this is a serious concern, I consult you to the 2001 mayoral election as a textbook example. Fernando Ferrer sat on his hands - the Bronx Democratic machine did nothing on election day - and Bloomberg won.
So the crux of the matter is that a third Hispanic district will be created, very likely in the Queens/southern and eastern Bronx area. Despite the fact that Crowley has close ties to Shelly Silver, he seems likeliest to be discomfited the most by the stark demographic realities of New York City.
5) In the past, New York State politicians in Albany have tended to privilege clout above all else. Anyone who sits on Appropriations (Israel, Hinchey, Lowey, Serrano), Ways and Means (Rangel for now, Crowley, Higgins), or Financial Services because of the state's ties to Wall Street and the large donations these members can draw (Maloney, Velazquez, Ackerman, Meeks, McCarthy) are generally immune from losing their districts. I would add to this list Peter King (the incoming chair of Homeland Security - very important in swinging money to NYC and the State which overrides national partisan political objectives) and Slaughter (on Rules, which if the national Democrats get their act together and win back the House, she will again chair).
6) Western New York, which took the brunt the last time will not this time around, even though that is the part of the state that is losing the most population. Either a prettier version of the dumbells will be created again for Slaughter, or there will be a Buffalo-Niagara Falls and a Rochester-Monroe County district.
7) The Hudson Valley (which gave up the other lost seat in 2002) will also not lose a seat. Nita Lowey is too powerful to consent to a Westchester brawl between her and Nan Haysworth. Hinchey's on the powerful appropriations committee so a Hudson Valley conglomerated district between him and Haysworth also isn't going to happen, either. Given the state GOP's desire to want to protect their most imperiled pickup, Buerkle's surprise defeat of Dan Maffei in the Syracuse-based district, Hinchey's elongated Southern Tier-Hudson Valley district will be needed to suck up ultra liberal votes out of Tompkins County.
Therefore, who might get targeted for elimination?
As a thought experiment, I'd figured I try redistricting the state of my birth (and my entire life up to age 30) under the Wyoming Rule discussed elsewhere on this website. Aside from truly applying "one-man, one vote" by ensuring that residents of the smallest state do not have more of a vote than residents of the 3rd largest, there were other benefits of the Wyoming Rule when applied to New York City. I was able under this map to create a new Hispanic VRA-compliant district in Queens (and give Valasquez an entire Brooklyn Hispanic district of her own). In Queens, it was also possible to create an Asian influence "coalition" district that might ensure the election of the first Asian-American congressmember from New York. And through the creation of several Queens/Nassau hybrid districts, I was able probably to ensure Peter King's removal from public office (a major goal of mine as he is just terrible). In the Bronx, with the smaller sized districts, it is possible not only to create another Hispanic VRA district (sorry Eliot Engel) but also an Black VRA district centered on northern Bronx and neighboring Mount Vernon.
Elsewhere, the major purpose of this map was to maximize Democratic-performing districts, particularly Downstate. I created an open GOP seat in Suffolk County but cracked Peter King's base and threw him into a 61% Obama district. Staten Island is divided into two and hence neutered as a possible source of Republican votes. In the Hudson Valley, three relatively safe Democratic seats were created with just one district with a Republican PVI (and that seat - Rockland/Orange, a reincarnation of the old Ben Gilman seat - is really more Democratic than the Obama percentages suggest).
Upstate, it is very possible to create a Democratic dummymander (as several of the maps on this site did last year in my opinion). You need to leave some Republican vote sinks. My map does this, aiming for a 7-4 split north of Maurice Hinchey's now Hudson Valley-centered district. Some of the 4 are within reach for an exceptionally strong Democratic candidate but only one of the 7 Democratic seats is realistically within reach for a Republican now.
This map creates just 6 districts where a Republican has a reasonable shot of winning (the new 2nd out in Suffolk County, the 24th in Rockland/Orange, and 4 districts upstate: the 28th and 29th in Central New York/Adirondacks region, and the 32nd and 34th in Western New York. 29 Democratic seats are at 58% Obama or higher, a 30th Democratic PVI seat (Bill Owen's new 26th) is at 56% Obama, the best you can draw in that area without splitting Albany which I did not want to do. A 30-6 delegation and not, I believe, a dummymander. But please let me know what you think.
This is the second part of two posts analyzing New York's recent Republican primary. It will focus upon Republican weakness in New York City, as revealed by the primary. The previous part can be found here.
New York City in the Republican Primary
One of the more interesting things about American politics is the rural-urban divide. The weakness of the modern Republican Party in urban areas is quite astounding. Much of this has to do with the history of the American city, especially the way in which many cities have become reservoirs of poor minorities.
The Republican gubernatorial primary constituted a particularly powerful demonstration of Republican weakness in American cities. To illustrate this, let's look at a map of turn-out in businessman Carl Paladino's victory over former representative Rick Lazio: