DJ, your take on redistricting is way, way too pessimistic. Unless the GOP gets killed in state governor’s races next year, it will control redistricting in most of the states that you mentioned, and your claims of judicial interference are overblown. Case in point, NC, where even when a liberal judge forced the GOP legislature to redraw congressional districts (because they took race into consideration *exactly as the DOJ had mandated and Democrat redistricters had done in the prior two rounds of redistricting*), the GOP legislature redrew the maps and we still came away with the same 10-3 split as in the original map. (BTW, NC is one state that we don’t need to worry about whether the RAT steals the governorship once again in 2020, given that the state constitution does not grant the governor veto power over redistricting legislation.)
I’m not going to go into too much detail here, but I’ll mention a couple of states where you’re pessimism is unfounded. In OH (which will lose one seat), unless the 2018 and 2020 elections reveal that GOP gains in blue-collar NE OH were a total fluke, it will be relatively easy for GOP redistricters to eliminate Tim Ryan’s Mahoning/Warren-based CD. Moreover, If GOP blue-collar gains are real, it may not be necessary to have two RAT cities taking in Cleveland (a white one that stretches all the way to Toledo, and a black one that slinks down to take in black parts of Akron) and instead have one hyper-Democrat CD in Cleveland (still black-majority, so it won’t give us VRA problems), which would turn the already very Republican OH U.S. House delegation (12R, 4D) into a hyper-Republican 13R, 2D delegation, with the new GOP district being drawn in the Cleveland suburbs.
PA also will lose one seat, and if 2016 GOP gains in blue-collar areas were not a fluke (I’m not talking about Trump’s performance which I doubt can be replicated by House GOP candidates in PA; I’m using Toomey’s performance as a truer proxy of what we may expect from congressional candidates not just in blue-collar areas but in affluent areas, where Toomey’s drop from 2010 was not as great as Trump’s drop from Romney’s results), Cartwright’s Scranton/Wilkes-Barre/Easton CD (which stupidly includes all of conservative Schuylkill County; Republicans were afraid of Democrat Congressman Holden winning any district with his home county in it) can be eliminated quite easily. And there is no need to draw a single heavily black CD in Philly (which, in any even, may lead to the courts intervening under the new liberal theory that having too large of a black majority in a black-majority CD is unconstitutional, since the three heavily RAT seats in the Philly metro area merely can be expanded to take in RAT voters from marginal GOP CDs that surround them (think of heavily RAT areas in Lower Bucks, Montco and Delco currently in the 8th, 6th and 7th CDs).
MN will lose a seat, and if the GOP gets to control the process it would be easy to draw two heavily RAT CDs in the Twin Cities area (again, no need to get greedy and draw a CD that combines Minneapolis and St. Paul, since the close-in suburbs are so Democrat that one won’t be able to avoid drawing another RAT CD there anyhow) and end up with a 5R-2D House delegation (a huge improvement from the current 5D-3R delegation in which three RATs represent GOP-leaning or marginal CDs and two Republicans represent RAT-leaning or marginal CDs).
TX will gain 3 seats (it would be shocking if it were only 2, and 4 is unlikely), and Democrats will not control the process or be able to increase their net numbers. Given Trump’s underperformance in affluent areas, it may be wise to draw CDs that combine close-in suburbs with some more blue-collar exurban areas so that the GOP could win those seats comfortably under both 2012 and 2016 scenarios.
Assuming that the GOP does well in state legislative and gubernatorial elections, my prediction is that, nationally, the number of CDs that would have voted for both Romney and Trump in 2012 and 2016 will increase, not decrease. So you can walk off the ledge, DJ. : )
Great discussion you guys.
But the wild card are the voter reg changes, which show REGARDLESS of how the districts are drawn, it might not make much difference. Rs are gaining substantially in FL, PA, IA, MN, NC and so on. Ds are declining.
By 2020, these changes could be so profound as to render both of your “geographical” and “structural” arguments irrelevant.