A more general way to ask this question is to pose it as follows:
1) In 2026, the statewide vote could be as close as 50%-50%.
2) If the legislature packs D's in 9 districts that are 70%D/30%R, the remaining 29 districts must average 56%R/44%D.
3) To escape a dummymander, these must be cut precisely. This is possible, but challenging.
One way to accomplish this would be after drawing the packed Democratic districts, then drawing 29 R-dominated districts that are as close to 60%R, 40%D as possible using 2020 Presidential voting data.
If anyone would care to draw such a map, by all means please post it here.
This demonstrates that it is technically possible to draw a plan with 29 safe Republican seats, using 2020 Presidential data. Note, however, that it includes districts that take up to 10 hours to traverse by car - see the one that includes Corpus Christi and the outskirts of Amarillo.
I think that the bigger danger for Texas GOP is pissing off voters with the power grab especially when doing it immediately after a tragedy that showcases all of the weaknesses of GOP governing (no spending on infrastructure, not paying experts, regulations are always bad). I would trade 5 House seats for the Governor’s mansion and the Senate seat.
I looked at that map that “guarantees” 29 seats. That 1st district is enormous.
Excellent and timely post, Dr. Wang. Another factor to consider is the lack of competitiveness in these gerrymandered maps. Your simulations produce a useful distribution not only for R-D balance but also number of competitive districts. I'd love to see this factored into this and similar posts. Voter choice is limited when competition is squeezed out of the map.
This was a great post, and it generated some good conversations within the fair redistricting group that I volunteer with!
Regardless of what Texas ends up doing, I've really come to believe that the best way to get national redistricting reform passed in Congress is for Democrats in CA, CO, and even here in NJ to unwind their commissions in time for 2031 redistricting. Republicans are only going to support reform at the national level if they see that gerrymandering hurts them more than it does Democrats.
The old approach of state-by-state redistricting reform is just not cutting it anymore. :(
Didn't Tom DeLay do this in Texas previously?
Sam, I love the title of this essay! The lesson for Abbott here is Don't Mess with Texas
One note: we did not search exhaustively.
A more general way to ask this question is to pose it as follows:
1) In 2026, the statewide vote could be as close as 50%-50%.
2) If the legislature packs D's in 9 districts that are 70%D/30%R, the remaining 29 districts must average 56%R/44%D.
3) To escape a dummymander, these must be cut precisely. This is possible, but challenging.
One way to accomplish this would be after drawing the packed Democratic districts, then drawing 29 R-dominated districts that are as close to 60%R, 40%D as possible using 2020 Presidential voting data.
If anyone would care to draw such a map, by all means please post it here.
Here is an example that almost satisfies the conditions listed above: https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::374103db-2238-4479-9469-aa355012f79b
This demonstrates that it is technically possible to draw a plan with 29 safe Republican seats, using 2020 Presidential data. Note, however, that it includes districts that take up to 10 hours to traverse by car - see the one that includes Corpus Christi and the outskirts of Amarillo.
I think that the bigger danger for Texas GOP is pissing off voters with the power grab especially when doing it immediately after a tragedy that showcases all of the weaknesses of GOP governing (no spending on infrastructure, not paying experts, regulations are always bad). I would trade 5 House seats for the Governor’s mansion and the Senate seat.
I looked at that map that “guarantees” 29 seats. That 1st district is enormous.
Excellent and timely post, Dr. Wang. Another factor to consider is the lack of competitiveness in these gerrymandered maps. Your simulations produce a useful distribution not only for R-D balance but also number of competitive districts. I'd love to see this factored into this and similar posts. Voter choice is limited when competition is squeezed out of the map.
This was a great post, and it generated some good conversations within the fair redistricting group that I volunteer with!
Regardless of what Texas ends up doing, I've really come to believe that the best way to get national redistricting reform passed in Congress is for Democrats in CA, CO, and even here in NJ to unwind their commissions in time for 2031 redistricting. Republicans are only going to support reform at the national level if they see that gerrymandering hurts them more than it does Democrats.
The old approach of state-by-state redistricting reform is just not cutting it anymore. :(