Posted on 06/27/2002 8:52:46 AM PDT by white trash redneck
By my count, the Democrats lost two seats relative to the Republicans. That means redistricting was a Republican "win." But because a net of two seats is far below initial Republican predictions, the outcome is also a "win" for Congressional Democrats.
Evaluating redistricting outcomes is a subjective (and often confusing) business, but that's not the same thing as saying any count is as good as any other.
I'm interested in changes in party control, not whether a district becomes "more Democratic" or "more Republican" - unless that change could affect which party has the advantage for November. Turning a seat from a "lean" one way to a "tossup" or a "lean" the other way is what it's all about.
In most cases, I ignore individual candidates, since I'm counting districts, not people. But it seems naive to discount incumbency completely, since a district with a strong incumbent needs to be changed more dramatically to alter party control than does an open seat.
Sometimes a district is redrawn enough to change party control after the current incumbent retires. But unless the redrawn district can flip control in 2002, I don't count it as having changed party through redistricting. After all, I can't predict retirements.
At the end of the day, it's a matter of judgment: Has a district been changed enough to call it a "takeover?"
Some states are easy to count. The Democratic-controlled Indiana Legislature, which needed to eliminate one of the state's House districts, combined the districts of two GOP incumbents, Reps. Steve Buyer and Brian Kerns. The result in the state: a net loss of one seat for the Republicans.
In Colorado, a judge drew a map that created one district that has no incumbent and favors neither party. It's a tossup.
In other states, the counting gets more complicated because of a change in the number of districts and dramatic changes in the districts themselves. In Michigan, the Democrats lose three districts and the Republicans add two. In Georgia, the Republicans lose two districts, while the Democrats add four.
If you make your own count, here's a tip: To check your math on an individual state, add the GOP, Democratic and tossup numbers for that state together. If the state neither gains nor loses districts, the three numbers should add up to zero. Otherwise, the three should add up to the number of districts gained or lost by the state because of reapportionment. In Georgia, for example, start with the Democrats' gain (4), subtract the GOP's loss (2), and come up with the number of seats the state gained after the 2000 Census (2).
Only one state causes a serious problem with calculating net changes: Connecticut. The Nutmeg State loses one district, and the Legislature threw two incumbents, Reps. Jim Maloney (D) and Nancy Johnson (R), together in a redrawn seat that favors neither incumbent. The only way to count this is to subtract one-half of a district from each party.
By my calculations, changes took place in 22 states. That is, those states either lost districts, gained districts or had existing districts redrawn enough to change party control. Redistricting was a nonevent in the other 28 states.
Three new tossups were created, in Arizona, Colorado and Nevada. Nationally, the Republicans lost a net of one-half seat and the Democrats lost a net of two and one-half seats. (To check your math again, add up all of the Democratic, Republican and tossup changes. You should come to zero.)
The two most difficult districts to assess are Republican Rep. Robin Hayes' redrawn North Carolina 8th and Democratic Rep. Bill Luther's new Minnesota 2nd. Ultimately, I decided to count both as redistricting changes. I did not count the Utah 2nd as a partisan change, though the district was redrawn considerably.
Obviously, the best laid plans go astray, and the outcome of the elections will depend on the voters, not the mapmakers. Some districts drawn to elect one party will likely send someone from a different party to Congress. But that's a different matter - and a future column.
States With Partisan
Changes After Redistricting
Alabama D+1, R-1
Arizona D+1, Toss+1
California D+1
Colorado Toss+1
Connecticut D-1/2, R-1/2
Florida R+2
Georgia D+4, R-2
Illinois D-1
Indiana R-1
Maryland D+2, R-2
Michigan D-3, R+2
Minnesota D-1, R+1
Mississippi D-1
Nevada Toss+1
New York D-1, R-1
North Carolina D+2,-1R
Ohio D-2, R+1
Oklahoma R-1
Pennsylvania D-4, R+2
Tennessee D+1, R-1
Texas R+2
Wisconsin D-1
That +2 is really +4, just based on those two likely-incorrect predictions of his. And Commie Morella isn't toast (yet) in MD-8. But since she's the ultimate RINO, we can't necessarily count that as a "win" either.
DWG
You're not wrong. What Rothenberg is trying to do is to predict how the redistricting will affect the outcome of the election.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.