In 2012, Democratic House candidates earned more votes combined than Republicans did, but the Democratic Party still came nowhere close to reclaiming the chamber. Now, Democrats are faced with the grim reality that they're likely to be locked out of the House until 2022 at the very earliest, barring a wave election that no one can count on.
But it shouldn't be this way. As we'll demonstrate, it's eminently possible to draw nonpartisan congressional districts that give voters a real choice and allow the majority to have its voice heard. Below, you'll find proposed maps for the Upper South that reflect these principles.
North Carolina — Proposed Map:
Click any map to enlarge
Interactive version • District summary stats
Current Map:
Drawn by: Republican legislature. Democratic governor could not veto redistricting.
Intended to Favor: Republicans
Delegation: 4 Democrats, 9 Republicans
2012 Vote: Obama 48, Romney 50
Summary: Republicans would have effectively maximized their seats in redistricting, but a relatively weak nominee and a strong Democratic incumbent prevented them from winning one targeted seat. North Carolina is the most aggressive partisan gerrymander in the country.
Net Change: Democrats gain three to four seats
North Carolina was by far the most aggressive partisan gerrymander in the country. Democrats currently have just three of the 13 seats in a state where Democratic candidates actually won the popular vote in 2012. This map radically redraws the state, with the biggest impact being that the racially gerrymandered 12th District is dismantled. That district is in no way required by the VRA to snake from Charlotte to the Triad. By confining the district to Charlotte, it is still majority minority and would elect an African American.
That allows the three cities of the Triad to form the new 9th district, while Republican Rep. Robert Pittenger's seat is eliminated. African-American Rep. Alma Adams would have won the new 9th, increasing minority representation by ending the racial gerrymander. Head below the fold to see the political impact of this new map as well as the rest of the Upper South.
In the west of the state, Asheville is reunited and Democratic Rep. Heath Shuler would have easily won. The only reason the then-40-year-old Shuler retired was due to the gerrymander. Two underfunded Democrats took almost as many votes as the GOP candidates did in my version of NC-11, and there's little doubt that the popular and moderate Shuler could have held on here.
Further east, the 7th becomes considerably more Democratic by dropping exurban, dark red Johnston County and reuniting Wilmington. The district regains Democratic Rep. Mike McIntyre's base of heavily Democratic, heavily Native American Robeson County. McIntyre managed to win even the gerrymandered actual district and would have won this seat easily. Unfortunately, the Sandhills region is split between four seats, but this is a byproduct of the state just barely losing out on a 14th District in reapportionment.
In the Triangle, both the 4th and 13th remain solidly Democratic like they were prior to redistricting. Rep. Brad Miller would have easily carried the Raleigh-based 13th. The 1st District retracts from Durham, which should not be required by the VRA. Durham has little in common with the rest of the district and has far lower racial polarization. In the 2000s this district was simply plurality black as well and here it is drawn in a manner to avoid retrogression in the now-defunct VRA Section Five counties.
With the addition of Fayetteville, the 2nd becomes considerably more Democratic by 10.3 points. Romney carried it by 5.5 percent, but it is about as Democratic as the state itself down ballot. Congressional results in North Carolina exhibited a higher correlation with the average of statewide elections excluding the presidential race, meaning that metric is a stronger indicator of the change in partisanship
Republican Rep. Renee Ellmers would have been very vulnerable and could very well have lost with a strong Democratic challenger. However, former Democratic Rep. Bob Etheridge would have most likely sought a rematch rather than run a quixotic gubernatorial campaign. After his "Who are you!?" blow up with Republican trackers on video cost him the race in 2010, he would be an unattractive candidate for Democrats to nominate. Ultimately, this race would come down to the choice of nominee.
Arkansas — Proposed Map:
Interactive version • District summary stats
Current Map:
Drawn by: Democratic legislature
Intended to Favor: Democrats
Delegation: 4 Republicans
2012 Vote: Obama 37, Romney 61
Summary: Democrats drew a
dummymander, which is a map that unintentionally functions as a gerrymander for the opposite party.
Net Change: Democrats zero to one seat
Arkansas Democrats drew by far the most moronic map of anyone in the country. Despite the state's Republican trend and the loss of two seats in 2010, Democrats attempted to win three of the state's four districts as they did last decade. When Democratic Rep. Mike Ross retired, that predictably led to the party getting shut out in 2012. Democrats easily could have drawn a map with two solid districts, but instead drew lines that functioned as a Republican gerrymander.
The above map unites the Delta with the addition of Pine Bluff to the 1st. The 2nd retains the Little Rock metro area, while the 4th consists of southern and western Arkansas. The 3rd District adds the rest of the Ozarks from the 1st.
Politically, the 2nd and 3rd are little changed while the 4th becomes several points more Republican. All three are still solid red. The biggest change involves the 1st District, where Romney's margin declines by a wide 10.3 points. More importantly, the statewide average improves 9.3 percent for Democrats. This metric is more useful in Arkansas because ticket-splitting was prevalent in the state, but varies considerably by location. Thus the 1st is the most Democratic seat in the state in 2012, despite Romney's 15-point win.
Even though Democratic candidates lost the 1st by 8.5 percent, these were drastically underfunded candidates in races that were never competitive. It is very possible that Democrats would have landed a stronger challenger to Republican Rep. Rick Crawford and would have narrowly defeated him. Even in her 2010 landslide defeat, Sen. Blanche Lincoln only lost the 1st by 1.2 percent. In their 2014 landslide losses, Sen. Mark Pryor and former Rep. Mike Ross won over 46 percent and 49 percent there, respectively.
Given how this is still a conservative district, Crawford very well may have won. However it is just astounding that a nonpartisan map could net Democrats an additional seat compared to their own map. Their incompetence is simply staggering.
Kentucky — Proposed Map:
Interactive version • District summary stats
Current Map:
Drawn by: Republican Senate and Democratic House
Intended to Favor: Bipartisan incumbents
Delegation: 1 Democrat, 5 Republicans
2012 Vote: Obama 38, Romney 60
Summary: This map was intended to be a bipartisan, mild incumbent protection gerrymander. However, Democratic Rep. Ben Chandler still lost since the map did not protect him enough.
Net Change: None
Some Republicans in the legislature complained that the actual map was the "Ben Chandler Lifetime Employment Act," but he promptly lost re-election anyway. In this map, the 6th District isn't considerably different, only adding the rest of the suburban Lexington metro area. The Democratic 3rd District remains exactly the same, while the 1st loses its arm into Central Kentucky. It's still dark red, as are the 2nd and 4th.
The 5th sheds some of the most historically Republican territory in the country with the loss of Somerset, but given the long decline of Democrats in coal country, Republican Rep. Hal Rogers would have easily won if he still ran here. Amazingly enough though, then-Democratic state Sen. Dan Mongiardo carried the 5th by seven points in the 2004 U.S. Senate election. The 6th District becomes just 1.8 points better for Romney and Chandler clearly would have still lost.
Oklahoma — Proposed Map:
Interactive version • District summary stats
Current Map:
Drawn by: Republican governor and legislature
Intended to Favor: Republicans
Delegation: 5 Republicans
2012 Vote: Obama 33, Romney 67
Summary: Republicans didn't even need to aggressively gerrymander here, given how red the state is.
Net Change: None
This map redraws mainly the 1st and 5th to be more compact and less rural. Both are still heavily Republican, just like every district in the state. Republicans didn't even need to bother gerrymandering the 2nd and easily gained the open seat in 2012 over a highly touted Democratic nominee.
Tennessee — Proposed Map:
Interactive version • District summary stats
Current Map:
Drawn by: Republican legislature
Intended to Favor: Republicans
Delegation: 2 Democrats, 7 Republicans
2012 Vote: Obama 39, Romney 59
Summary: Republicans could have gained an additional district, making this the only state they drew where that is unquestionably true.
Net Change: None
Republicans easily could have cracked Nashville and defeated Democratic Rep. Jim Cooper, but didn't because their incumbents and the legislators who drew the map were more concerned about themselves. This map changes the 4th District considerably, but the partisan impact is negligible for every seat. The 5th and 9th remain safely Democratic while every other seat goes Republican.
Virginia — Proposed Map:
Interactive version • District summary stats
Current Map:
Drawn by: Republican governor and legislature
Intended to Favor: Republican
Delegation: 3 Democrats, 8 Republicans
2012 Vote: Obama 51, Romney 47
Summary: Republicans effectively maximized their seats. The 3rd District was subsequently struck down due to illegally packing black voters and the map is subject to ongoing litigation.
Net Change: Democrats gain two seats
Virginia is easily my favorite map out of the whole collection. Its regions fit fairly nicely into districts. For instance, the Shenandoah Valley comprises its own seat, the rest of the mountains get a seat, and Northern Virginia has just enough population for three districts.
Dismantling the racial gerrymander of the 3rd District, the 4th takes its place as the VRA black-majority seat. There is no need to take but just a sliver of Hampton, while racial polarization is higher in the rural Southside anyway. This allows the 3rd to become a compact Hampton Roads district that African-American Democratic Rep. Bobby Scott would have easily won. Thus, black representation in Virginia would double. It is impossible to draw two compact black-majority districts here, but this minority-influence district ought to be required when litigation concludes.
The 2nd District neatly comprises suburban Hampton Roads and remains marginal, although Romney now won it by 0.7 percent despite it voting for Obama in 2008. The Republican primary would have been a battle royale between Reps. Randy Forbes and Scott Rigell. Two-thirds of the seat comes from Rigell's old district, but in 2012 he was just a freshman compared to Forbes' longer tenure. Furthermore, Rigell is perceived to be considerably less conservative than Forbes, having even donated to Obama in 2008. If Forbes were to be nominated after a bruising primary, Democrats might have had an opening.
Outside Hampton Roads, the 5th District retains a similar partisanship and should be safe for Republican Rep. Robert Hurt. In Northern Virginia, Democrats gain an additional seat once the 10th is altered. It is highly likely that Republican Rep. Frank Wolf would have retired in 2012 rather than 2014. However even if he ran again, he would probably lose. The 10th gains a lot of new constituents and shifts 13.4 points to the left. Wolf beat his token opponent by 20.2 percent, but with new territory and a real campaign he is likely defeated here given Obama's 12.2 percent margin.
The 8th and 11th remain solidly Democratic, while the remaining districts are solidly Republican.
West Virginia — Proposed Map:
Interactive version • District summary stats
Current Map:
Drawn by: Democratic legislature
Intended to Favor: Democrats
Delegation: 1 Democrat, 2 Republicans
2012 Vote: Obama 35, Romney 63
Summary: Democrats drew a least change map from the 2000s map. This version is a geographic gerrymander holdover from when the state lost a district in the 1990s round of reapportionment.
Net Change: None
Democrats foolishly did not even attempt to gerrymander here. They could have improved the vulnerable 3rd District by giving it Charleston and other cities, which might have saved Democratic Rep. Nick Rahall in 2014. The actual 2nd District, which goes from Charleston to the eastern panhandle, was a legacy of the state losing a district in reapportionment and legislators aimed to eliminate a junior Democrat. This map rearranges the 1st and 2nd to be more compact, while also shifting a few counties in the 3rd.
The partisan impact is quite limited, with the 2nd now being about as Democratic as the state, while the 3rd gets a few tenths of a percent more Democratic. West Virginia has the highest rate of geographically varied ticket splitting, so the statewide average is much more informative than Obama's performance. Republicans would have still easily won the 1st and 2nd, while Rahall wins by high single digits.
By comparing the Democratic seat share in each state to Obama's vote share, we can approximate the disportionality in each state. The broader South is by far the worst region for geography bias against Democrats. This is unsurprising considering it is also has one of the highest rates of partisan polarization, while partisan and racial segregation are also very strong. However, this region's anti-Democratic bias is neutralized by their advantage in the Northeast.
Because nearly every single map in this region benefitted Republicans, Democrats stand to gain considerably with a net of six additional seats.
Methodology
The criteria for drawing optimal districts are numbered below in order prioritization, but it is important that these factors be balanced with one another.
1. Ignore partisanship
2. Comply with the Voting Rights Act's demand for majority-minority districts
3. Utilize communities of interest like shared culture or economic class
4. Minimize unnecessary city and county splits
5. Geographic, not geometric compactness
You can find further details on the methodology used to construct these districts here, as well as all of the associated data files.
For all of our posts in the Nonpartisan Redistricting series, click here.
