[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers

View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally Blue CA Ad Network

Redistricting California (Part 2): State Senate

by: cali_girl_in_texas

Sun Feb 27, 2011 at 23:21:01 PM PST


(More great stuff on redistricting California from cali_girl_in_texas - promoted by Brian Leubitz)

Here is my attempt at redistricting the California State Senate. With over 936,000 people per district, satisfying communities of interest becomes a bit more challenging. Here are the districts I ended up drawing.

Majority-White: 22
Majority-Hispanic: 8
Majority-Minority: 10

Safe Dem: 19
Likely Dem: 1
Lean Dem: 3
Toss-Up: 7
Lean GOP: 3
Likely GOP: 6
Safe GOP: 1

EDIT BY BRIAN: See the flip for the full run-down of the Senate districts in this proposed map.
cali_girl_in_texas :: Redistricting California (Part 2): State Senate
Outer NorCal

Photobucket

SD-01: Coastal NorCal (Previously SD-02) (Noreen Evans)
Description: Similar shape to the old district, plus added Del Norte County and the westernmost part of Solano to satisfy district size
Demographics: 68.4% White, 16.1% Hispanic, 5.6% Asian
2008 President: Obama 69.1%, McCain 28.5% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

SD-02: Central Valley and Yolo County (Previously SD-04) (Doug LaMalfa and Lois Wolk unless she moves to the new SD-05)
Description: Similar to previous configuration only I added Yolo County to satisfy population size. Lois Wolk (from Davis and currently in SD-05) would be put into this district and would lose to LaMalfa unless she moved to the new SD-05.
Demographics: 71.8% White, 16.1% Hispanic, 5.5% Asian
2008 President: McCain 49.9%, Obama 47.9% (LEAN GOP: R+4)

SD-03: All of Marin, eastern San Francisco, and SE Sonoma (Mark Leno)
Demographics: 56.4% White, 17.8% Asian, 15.6% Hispanic, 6.7% Black
2008 President: Obama 82.2%, McCain 15.8% (SAFE DEM: D+29)

SD-04: Mountain counties along most of the Nevada border plus some Sacramento suburbs (Previously SD-01) (Ted Gaines)
Demographics: 80.8% White, 10.0% Hispanic
2008 President: McCain 54.1%, Obama 44.9% (LIKELY GOP: R+8)

SD-05: Most of Solano and Sacramento, NW San Joaquin (Lois Wolk if she moves here from SD-02)
Description: Removed Yolo and included more of Sacramento
Demographics: 59.5% White, 18.2% Hispanic, 10.2% Asian, 7.2% Black
2008 President: Obama 53.4%, McCain 44.9% (TOSS-UP: EVEN)

SD-06: Sacramento and some inner suburbs (Darrell Steinberg)
Demographics: 50.3% White, 17.9% Hispanic, 14.2% Asian, 11.8% Black
2008 President: Obama 65.1%, McCain 33.0% (SAFE DEM: D+12)

San Francisco Bay Area

Photobucket

SD-07: Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond, Martinez (Previously SD-09) (Loni Hancock)
Demographics: 36.0% White, 24.2% Black, 18.5% Hispanic, 16.7% Asian
2008 President: Obama 86.7%, McCain 11.3% (SAFE DEM: D+33)

SD-08: Western half of San Francisco, most of San Mateo (Leland Yee)
Demographics: 46.4% White, 27.6% Asian, 18.3% Hispanic
2008 President: Obama 75.4%, McCain 22.8% (SAFE DEM: D+22)

SD-09: Inland Alameda and Contra Costa (Previously SD-07) (Mark DeSaulnier)
Demographics: 67.9% White, 14.5% Hispanic, 9.3% Asian
2008 President: Obama 63.0%, McCain 35.3% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

SD-10: Western Alameda County and Milpitas in Santa Clara County (Ellen Corbett)
Demographics: 32.9% White, 31.4% Asian, 24.6% Hispanic, 6.1% Black
2008 President: Obama 72.7%, McCain 25.4% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

SD-11: Silicon Valley and Santa Cruz County (Joe Simitian)
Demographics: 58.4% White, 20.2% Asian, 15.9% Hispanic
2008 President: Obama 73.7%, McCain 24.2% (SAFE DEM: D+21)

SD-12: San Jose and part of Stanislaus County (Previously SD-13) (Elaine Alquist)
Demographics: 42.4% White, 31.0% Hispanic, 19.6% Asian
2008 President: Obama 67.4%, McCain 30.9% (SAFE DEM: D+14)

SD-13: Stockton, Modesto, Merced (Previously SD-12) (Anthony Cannella)
Demographics: 50.0% White, 34.1% Hispanic, 6.8% Asian
2008 President: Obama 52.1%, McCain 46.2% (TOSS-UP: R+1)

Central

Photobucket

SD-14: Eastern Central Valley and northern half of Fresno (Tom Berryhill)
Demographics: 57.9% White, 28.7% Hispanic, 5.6% Asian
2008 President: McCain 53.6%, Obama 44.7% (LIKELY GOP: R+8)

SD-15: Central Coast (Sam Blakeslee)
Description: Still a Central Coast-centric district, only I removed Santa Cruz, put Monterey completely within the district, and stretched a little further into Santa Barbara
Demographics: 55.1% White, 33.9% Hispanic
2008 President: Obama 57.0%, McCain 41.0% (LEAN DEM: D+4)

SD-16: Western Central Valley (Michael Rubio)
Description: Did some tweaking to keep it sufficiently Hispanic to satisfy the VRA
Demographics: 60.1% Hispanic, 24.6% White, 5.9% Asian, 5.8% Black
2008 President: Obama 55.6%, McCain 42.8% (TOSS-UP: D+2.5)

SD-17: Inyo County, Tulare, Bakersfield (Previously SD-18) (Jean Fuller)
Demographics: 57.0% White, 32.1% Hispanic
2008 President: McCain 60.8%, Obama 37.4% (SAFE GOP: R+15)

SD-18: Remainder of Santa Barbara and most of Ventura (Previously SD-19) (Tony Strickland)
Description: This time I was able to keep Thousand Oaks and Simi Valley in the same district and not go over in population
Demographics: 58.5% White, 31.0% Hispanic, 5.5% Asian
2008 President: Obama 59.3%, McCain 38.9% (LEAN DEM: D+6)

SD-19: Antelope Valley, keeping Lancaster and Palmdale together (Previously SD-17) (Sharon Runner)
Demographics: 54.1% White, 27.2% Hispanic, 8.2% Asian, 6.8% Black
2008 President: Obama 53.3%, McCain 44.6% (TOSS-UP: EVEN)

Los Angeles/Orange County

Photobucket

SD-20: Hispanic side of the San Fernando Valley (Alex Padilla)
Demographics: 54.2% Hispanic, 30.4% White, 6.9% Asian
2008 President: Obama 73.2%, McCain 24.7% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

SD-21: Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena (Carol Liu)
Demographics: 37.2% White, 32.8% Hispanic, 20.0% Asian, 5.2% Black
2008 President: Obama 67.3%, McCain 30.6% (SAFE DEM: D+14)

SD-22: From Monterey Park to Diamond Bar (Kevin De Leon)
Demographics: 53.9% Hispanic, 26.0% Asian, 14.8% White
2008 President: Obama 64.9%, McCain 33.2% (SAFE DEM: D+12)

SD-23: West Side L.A. without the Ventura portion (Fran Pavley)
Demographics: 70.4% White, 13.0% Hispanic, 9.4% Asian
2008 President: Obama 72.9%, McCain 25.4% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

SD-24: South Central: Culver City, Inglewood, Compton (Previously parts of SD-25 and 26) (Rod Wright) (Curren Price)
Description: Due to demographic trends, it looks like the black populations of the current SD-25 and 26 will be merged into this district, which means Curren Price and Rod Wright will likely be in the same district.
Demographics: 41.8% Hispanic, 41.7% Black, 7.9% White, 5.8% Asian
2008 President: Obama 89.7%, McCain 9.1% (SAFE DEM: D+37)

SD-25: South Central (Previously parts of SD-25 and 26)
Description: Here I took the Hispanic parts of the current SD-25 and 26. Either of Wright or Price may run here, but an Hispanic candidate is far and away the favorite here
Demographics: 61.4% Hispanic, 14.0% Black, 11.4% Asian, 10.4% White
2008 President: Obama 84.2%, McCain 13.8% (SAFE DEM: D+31)

SD-26: Downtown L.A., Whittier, Pico Rivera (Previously SD-24) (Probably Ed Hernandez)
Description: Hernandez's home is in the new SD-22, though he may move and run here.
Demographics: 79.0% Hispanic, 11.4% White, 5.6% Asian
2008 President: Obama 73.1%, McCain 24.8% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

SD-27: Beach Cities, Carson, and Palos Verdes Peninsula (Previously SD-28) (Ted Lieu)
Demographics: 39.3% White, 31.7% Hispanic, 16.4% Asian, 8.9% Black
2008 President: Obama 62.0%, McCain 36.0% (LIKELY DEM: D+9)

SD-28: South Gate, Norwalk, Artesia, part of Long Beach (Previously parts of SD-27 and SD-30) (possibly Alan Lowenthal and Ron Calderon)
Description: I shifted Long Beach to the coastal OC district and found that I had too many people in that one, so I shifted part of Long Beach into this district. Part of Lowenthal's and Calderon's districts are put here, so they may face a primary unless one decides to retire.
Demographics: 55.7% Hispanic, 18.2% White, 12.3% Asian, 10.9% Black
2008 President: Obama 70.9%, McCain 27.0% (SAFE DEM: D+18)

SD-29: Northern L.A. suburbs (Previously parts of SD-29 and SD-31) (Bob Dutton and Bob Huff?)
Description: In L.A. and San Bern Counties to satisfy population size, from Arcadia to my hometown Rancho Cucamonga. Huff's home in Diamond Bar was shifted to the 22nd so he may move here.
Demographics: 43.8% White, 34.3% Hispanic, 9.3% Asian, 8.9% Black
2008 President: Obama 54.2%, McCain 43.8% (TOSS-UP: D+1)

SD-30: Fontana, Ontario, Chino, Montclair, Pomona (Previously SD-32) (Gloria Negrete-McLeod)
Demographics: 55.7% Hispanic, 25.0% White, 9.9% Black, 6.2% Asian
2008 President: Obama 63.7%, McCain 34.5% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

SD-31: Most of San Bernardino and in Riverside (Open)
Demographics: 64.2% White, 23.9% Hispanic, 5.2% Black
2008 President: McCain 55.2%, Obama 42.6% (LIKELY GOP: R+9)

SD-32: Coastal Orange County and part of Long Beach (Previously SD-35 and part of SD-27) (Tom Harman and Alan Lowenthal?)
Demographics: 69.3% White, 13.5% Hispanic, 12.6% Asian
2008 President: Obama 49.5%, McCain 48.6% (LEAN GOP: R+4)

SD-33: Garden Grove, Anaheim, Santa Ana (Previously SD-34) (Lou Correa)
Demographics: 54.2% Hispanic, 23.5% White, 17.5% Asian
2008 President: Obama 54.6%, McCain 43.5% (TOSS-UP: D+1)

SD-34: Inland Orange County (Previously SD-33) (Mimi Walters)
Demographics: 53.7% White, 27.2% Hispanic, 13.9% Asian
2008 President: McCain 53.1%, Obama 45.0% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

SD-35: Riverside, Norco, Moreno Valley, Corona (Previously part of SD-37) (Open)
Description: Rapid growth in Riverside County led to this district being excised off the eastern end of the old SD-37
Demographics: 43.0% White, 38.3% Hispanic, 9.2% Black, 5.6% Asian
2008 President: Obama 55.4%, McCain 42.7% (TOSS-UP: D+2)

Outer SoCal and San Diego

Photobucket

Photobucket

SD-36: Most of the rest of Riverside County (Previously SD-37) (Bill Emmerson)
Demographics: 53.7% White, 36.9% Hispanic
2008 President: McCain 49.6%, Obama 48.8% (LEAN GOP: R+3)

SD-37: Temecula, Southern OC, NW San Diego County to Carlsbad (Previously SD-36) (Joel Anderson?)
Demographics: 66.4% White, 21.4% Hispanic, 5.6% Asian
2008 President: McCain 53.5%, Obama 44.7% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

SD-38: Imperial County and as much of Eastern San Diego as could fit (Previously SD-37 and SD-40) (Mark Wyland)
Demographics: 57.8% White, 31.2% Hispanic
2008 President: McCain 53.2%, Obama 45.1% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

SD-39: Northern San Diego (Christine Kehoe)
Description: Northern half of San Diego, Solana Beach, Encinitas, Del Mar, Lemon Grove
Demographics: 63.2% White, 14.9% Hispanic, 13.7% Asian
2008 President: Obama 56.9%, McCain 41.4% (LEAN DEM: D+4)

SD-40: Southern San Diego (Previously part of SD-39) (Juan Vargas)
Description: Southern half of San Diego, Coronado, National City, Chula Vista, Imperial Beach
Demographics: 42.4% Hispanic, 32.5% White, 12.0% Asian, 9.4% Black
2008 President: Obama 66.3%, McCain 32.0% (SAFE DEM: D+13)
Tags: , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Redistricting California (Part 2): State Senate | 18 comments
Great stuff (0.00 / 0)
I haven't gone through this completely, but I did see that you have Lowenthal and Calderon competing.  Lowenthal is termed out in 2012, and Calderon in 2014, so shouldn't be a big issue there.

On another front, I think there might be an issue with numbering of these districts. I think you have to be careful on the numbers of the state senate districts, as only odd districts are up in 2012.

I think?

Interesting (0.00 / 0)
I wonder which is the 1 safe GOP District?
[ Parent ]
SD-17 (0.00 / 0)
nm
[ Parent ]
Wonderful (0.00 / 0)
It'll be nice to kick some Kooks out finally.
[ Parent ]
The numbering (0.00 / 0)
Brian is right the elections go with the Senate numbers not the people who are in the seats now....
Oh I see. (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
I'll be damned if SB County gets diluted by LA and Riverside Counties (0.00 / 0)
If this is accurate, you best believe SB County Dems are going to raise hell over this bullshit! I'm tired of mikie-fickies trying to dictate what goes on our county. We are not going to roll over like some damn dog that wants its belly scratched. Oh hell no!! SB County Dems will come out in force against this map. You better believe it! How can you F*ck us Cali-girl!? You're from Rancho! Times have changed!!!  
It was tough (0.00 / 0)
for me to draw the Inland Empire districts while keeping communities of interest and adequate district size in mind. Maybe I can try a revised map when all the Census data comes out later and also see what I can do with the Assembly maps I'm working on right now.

My blog


Twitter
[ Parent ]
Wow (0.00 / 0)
So, this was just an intellectual exercise, so I think we should all simmer down a bit.

I think for SB, they have to be combined with somebody for a Senate district, and there are problems going in any direction really.  

We'll see what the Commission comes up with in the next few months, but they are taking public comment. So, I'd implore you to try to get to one of the public comment sessions, or send them a letter or something that can get on the record.

I think?

[ Parent ]
This is, unfortunately, too good to come true (0.00 / 0)
The Commission is specifically enjoined from taking party into consideration when it comes to drawing party lines.  Something that showed up this lopsided would be DOA; it would have to be presumed to have taken party into consideration.

The argument we should be having -- the only argument likely to sway the commission -- is over what constitutes a community of interest or a natural boundary.  Moreover, and more importantly, we should figure out what the Republicans would want and argue as to what does not constitute a community of interest or natural boundary.

This commission is designed to be scrupulously fair, like it or not.  (And I don't.)  Given that, we have to approach them on their terms.  The "academic exercise" will be how can we make the arguments that don't look to party but that, when one compares them in terms of party, are still pretty damn good even if not maximally perfect for us.

What's the link again to this mapping program?  I remember having fun with it last year.

[ Parent ]
What the Republicans want (0.00 / 0)
The Republicans are hoping for two things and could get them depending on how the law is interpreted.  First, they are hoping that all minority districts will be created in line with civil rights requirements, but nothing to be done with party registration to make sure this doesn't have an impact on the state as a whole.  This has the same effect as a gerrymander by creating districts that are so overwhelmingly Democratic without any counterbalance that it skews the overall numbers.  The second thing they hope to take advantage of the requirement for cities and counties to be kept together to eliminate Democratic districts.  Los Angeles and San Francisco qualify as cities.  If you have to draw those areas before you go anywhere else, you eliminate a whole passle of Democratic districts that are now created by combining portions of LA with neighboring communities with similar ethnicities, i.e. Latino's on the East side where LA currently has several districts that include neighboring cities, but dip down into LA for some of their votes.  If that changes, you have an instant loss.  By the way, in a memo that was made public after Prop 20 failed, Congressional Republicans predicted large gains in both houses of the legislature and Congress and stated that it was possible they could even get a majority in one of the houses depending on how the commission decided some of the key issues.  Frankly we seem to have some commissioners with a conscience, so I am not expecting that, but it is definitely a nervous time for elected officials on both sides.
[ Parent ]
Here's what the rules say, I think it's according to Common Cause: (0.00 / 0)
California's new Redistricting Commission has begun holding public hearings on new districts for Congress and State Senate and Assembly.

In ranked order, the criteria for districts are:


1. Comply with the U.S. Constitution, including equal population requirements.

2. Comply with the federal Voting Rights Act.

3. Be geographically contiguous.

4. Respect the geographic integrity of any city, county, or city and county, neighborhood, or "community of interest." "Communities of interest" shall not be defined as related to incumbents, candidates, or parties.

5. To the extent practicable, after the above criteria have been satisfied, be compact.

6. To the extent practicable, after the above criteria have been satisfied, be nested.

There are two "anti-criteria":  Incumbents' residences may not be considered.

Common Cause lists another criterion, but I don't know if it's embedded in legislation or just wishful thinking on their part: "Competitive districts shall be favored - The commission shall make use of necessary election data in order to draw competitive congressional and legislative districts where practicable."

So that's what the Commission is supposed to do.  I don't think we'll see non-compact districts.  If you want to see, say, persons of a particular ethnicity put into a district with those of another ethnicity, then prepare to argue about "communities of interest."  Their stuffing a district 100% full of minorities would probably violate the "competitiveness" semi-criteria.  That's what we lobby about, I suppose.

So are there ideas on how to split up what might seem like reasonably cohesive but extremely Democratic areas?  Not so simple.

[ Parent ]
That is correct (0.00 / 0)
But the key factors I mentioned involve complying with the Federal Voting Rights act and will depend on how the commission interprets the law including federal court cases.  Your comments would imply that all of these requirements are to be put together, but in reality, the commission has to consider them in the order listed and that is the rub.  

In the state of Georgia, a Republican political operative came up with the idea I mentioned above of overcomplying with voting rights concerns by pulling in as many minorities as possible into as few districts as possible.  This created several overwhelming Democratic districts while making the vast majority of legislative districts lean Republican.  Since that time there have been many court cases on this issue and the requirements of the Voting Rights Act can be interpreted in different ways.  Republicans are hoping the commission will interpret it by strict interpretation of the letter of the law.  Some would argue that the commission has to consider the overall impact of their work, not just taking representation in a vacuum and only creating as many minority districts as possible.  How the commission deals with that issue will be the single most significant thing that they do.

On keeping cities, counties, etc. together and the compactness requirement which is further down the list, you get the question I mentioned earlier.  If you keep LA together, you probably wind up eliminating several Democratic seats.  To give an easy example, in the 36th Congressional District, if you eliminate everything in the City of Los Angeles, you turn that into at least a very marginal seat or more likely you lose a Democratic seat.  

[ Parent ]
Minority Representation (0.00 / 0)
I should add that you also have a major problem in drawing districts because so many poor people live in the same neighborhoods.  For example in the last reapportionment, there were a lot of comments about Rancho Palos Verdes being combined with places like Inglewood in one State Senate district.   The reason was not to favor Democrats in some way like many supposed, it was to create a State Senate seat that had some reasonable similarity of interests (there are actually more than most people suppose) but also to create a district that an African American could win.  That is very hard to do, even if you are trying and for an unbiased commission to be able to work that out could wind up being very hard.  Many so called "experts" are already predicting that either Maxine Waters or Karen Bass will wind up losing their seat after the commission is done, with a new African American district perhaps being created somewhere in the Inland Empire and that is just one example of a possible outcome.    But there are just as many possibilities for either party.  For example if you create an Asian Congressional District in Orange County which you could argue the Voting Rights act might require, that district would be safe Republican because it would be overwhelmingly Vietnamese, then several Republicans in Orange County could lose their seats to other areas.   It's all hard to predict, especially since this is a commission that is not answerable to anyone but themselves.    
[ Parent ]
Here. (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
Great Stuff (0.00 / 0)
It's a shame one can no longer recommend diaries, this deserves it.  Good work.
Census Numbers will be out next Week (0.00 / 0)
Story:
California's 2010 census results to come out next week - By Matt O'Brien - Contra Costa Times

The U.S. Census Bureau next week will deliver the California results of the 2010 census, allowing a new statewide redistricting commission to begin the work of redrawing political boundaries.
The public release of census information will also give Californians a trove of data about how their cities, counties and neighborhoods have changed since the last decennial census in 2000.
By law, the Census Bureau must provide redistricting data to the 50 states no later than April 1. The bureau has been releasing each state's census data on a rolling basis since early February. More than half of the states have already been released. The bureau announced on Wednesday that California's information would come sometime next week.
The bureau in December released the total population of each state, which revealed that California -- with 10 percent population growth since 2000 -- will neither gain nor lose a seat in Congress.

Link: http://www.mercurynews.com/bre...

Redistricting California (Part 2): State Senate | 18 comments
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads


Support Calitics:

Get discounted bestsellers at Barnes & Noble.com!

Advertisers


-->
California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary
Powered by: SoapBlox