Time To Make the Districts: The House of Representatives
OK, I admit it, I’ve let you down. Not that it’s the first time that’s happened.
I’m not gonna have time to do a comprehensive analysis of all 41 districts and their likely permutations. However, I do have time to look at what George and Jerry might call ‘shrinkage’. Starting first from the basic premise that the D’s should solidify their hold on the House without stretching themselves too thin.
Plus my seminal senate redistricting articles, here, here, and here, clearly show where new districts would likely go (southern NCC and coastal Sussex, for sure), so the real question is…which districts disappear?
Here are the key numbers to remember for this exercise: There are 41 House districts now, there will be 41 House districts following redistricting. The average population of each district is around 21,901. A deviation of plus or minus 5% is legally permissible, meaning that the permissible population for each House district will range from a low of 20,806 to a high of 22,996.
The post-census district populations are as follows (thanks to my inside source):
| House District | 2000 pop. | 2010 pop. | change | Over/under 21,900 | over/under % |
| 1 | 18,293 | 17,648 | -3.5% | -4,252 | -19.4% |
| 2 | 19,953 | 19,571 | -1.9% | -2,329 | -10.6% |
| 3 | 19,993 | 19,215 | -3.9% | -2,685 | -12.3% |
| 4 | 18,198 | 18,103 | -0.5% | -3,797 | -17.3% |
| 5 | 20,148 | 21,154 | 5.0% | -746 | -3.4% |
| 6 | 19,786 | 19,877 | 0.5% | -2,023 | -9.2% |
| 7 | 18,626 | 17,251 | -7.4% | -4,649 | -21.2% |
| 8 | 18,161 | 34,905 | 92.2% | 13,005 | 59.4% |
| 9 | 18,174 | 28,290 | 55.7% | 6,390 | 29.2% |
| 10 | 19,468 | 20,187 | 3.7% | -1,713 | -7.8% |
| 11 | 19,340 | 18,472 | -4.5% | -3,428 | -15.7% |
| 12 | 18,682 | 19,321 | 3.4% | -2,579 | -11.8% |
| 13 | 20,079 | 20,700 | 3.1% | -1,200 | -5.5% |
| 14 | 18,482 | 25,997 | 40.7% | 4,097 | 18.7% |
| 15 | 19,204 | 27,756 | 44.5% | 5,856 | 26.7% |
| 16 | 19,683 | 19,396 | -1.5% | -2,504 | -11.4% |
| 17 | 19,569 | 19,739 | 0.9% | -2,161 | -9.9% |
| 18 | 19,658 | 19,810 | 0.8% | -2,090 | -9.5% |
| 19 | 19,905 | 19,301 | -3.0% | -2,599 | -11.9% |
| 20 | 19,729 | 19,614 | -0.6% | -2,286 | -10.4% |
| 21 | 19,077 | 18,919 | -0.8% | -2,981 | -13.6% |
| 22 | 19,176 | 18,853 | -1.7% | -3,047 | -13.9% |
| 23 | 20,079 | 22,367 | 11.4% | 467 | 2.1% |
| 24 | 19,230 | 19,060 | -0.9% | -2,840 | -13.0% |
| 25 | 20,066 | 20,925 | 4.3% | -975 | -4.5% |
| 26 | 19,877 | 21,143 | 6.4% | -757 | -3.5% |
| 27 | 18,671 | 20,226 | 8.3% | -1,674 | -7.6% |
| 28 | 18,187 | 22,917 | 26.0% | 1,017 | 4.6% |
| 29 | 18,168 | 27,839 | 53.2% | 5,939 | 27.1% |
| 30 | 18,201 | 22,102 | 21.4% | 202 | 0.9% |
| 31 | 18,157 | 20,814 | 14.6% | -1,086 | -5.0% |
| 32 | 18,121 | 20,481 | 13.0% | -1,419 | -6.5% |
| 33 | 18,176 | 24,737 | 36.1% | 2,837 | 13.0% |
| 34 | 18,205 | 23,514 | 29.2% | 1,614 | 7.4% |
| 35 | 18,334 | 22,751 | 24.1% | 851 | 3.9% |
| 36 | 19,134 | 26,484 | 38.4% | 4,584 | 20.9% |
| 37 | 19,722 | 24,694 | 25.2% | 2,794 | 12.8% |
| 38 | 20,029 | 25,569 | 27.7% | 3,669 | 16.8% |
| 39 | 18,165 | 19,663 | 8.2% | -2,237 | -10.2% |
| 40 | 19,657 | 22,338 | 13.6% | 438 | 2.0% |
| 41 | 20,039 | 26,231 | 30.9% | 4,331 | 19.8% |
The City of Wilmington will have to lose a district. In theory, you might be able to keep all four if you moved each of them further outside the city limits but it would create geometrically (and geographically) more problems than it would solve. Dennis P. Williams (1st) has said that he’ll run again, and he’s got seniority, plus he chairs the Joint Finance Committee, so he’s in. Stephanie Bolden (2nd) represents a minority/majority district, so she’s in as well. That leaves both Helene Keeley (3rd) and Gerald Brady (4th). I’ve made no secret that I much prefer Keeley, as honesty is a value that I appreciate in an elected official. Organized labor’s made no secret that it prefers its puppet and ‘executive director’ Brady. The only fair thing to do is to put them both in the same district and let them run in a primary. The Senate’s not really an option for either of them, as Keeley resides in the 3rd Senatorial District (Marshall), which will almost surely be eliminated during senate redistricting. Brady is in McDowell’s district, and they are allies, if not exactly bosom buddies. Remaining excess population from the city districts resulting from downsizing from 4 to 3 can go to shore up numbers in the 13th (John Mitchell-Elsmere), the 16th (J. J. Johnson-New Castle) and possibly to shore up R numbers in Lavelle’s district (11th). As to the latter, I’d much prefer to keep the suburban portion of the 4th in the new Keeley/Brady district as the district would still be overwhelmingly Democratic and it would deny #’s to the Rethugs in Chateau Country.
So, basically give or take a wavy line here or there, the City will have three districts and Mitchell and Johnson will have their numbers. Net result: D’s lose one district in the City of Wilmington. Necessary, but no fun.
Now the fun begins. The single most important key to redistricting Brandywine Hundred, Chateau Country, Hockessin, and portions of the Greater Newark area is to do what should have been done 10 years ago. Wayne Smith drew two districts ranging from west of Route 202 down to the Delaware River. He did it to protect both Bob Valihura and Greg Lavelle, who lived west of the Concord Pike, but who needed numbers they could only get from having districts that roamed far afield of their residences. In order to protect and provide the needed numbers for Democrats Deb Heffernan (6th) and Bryon Short (7th), and to provide at least a swing district for Dennis E. Williams (10th), Greg Lavelle’s district must not be allowed to extend east of Route 202.
Here is your one-stop shop for maps. You really should follow along to understand and enjoy what I propose. Click on RD 11, which is Lavelle’s district. Yes, that district is as insanely gerrymandered as it appears. Basically four craggy lumps connected by string, kinda like Wilma Flintstone’s necklace. You will also notice that at most 25% of the residents live in the portion of the district west of 202. Let’s ‘de-lump’ them. If you cut the district at 202, then the McDaniel Crest/Fairfax/Deerhurst portion easily fits into Dennis E. Williams’ district with Foulk Road as a major boundary, the Green Acres/Graylyn Crest portion fits squarely into Bryon Short’s district, with either the railroad tracks or I-95 serving as a boundary, and the remaining Claymont portion fits snugly into Deb Heffernan’s district.
We’re not done with Brandywine Hundred and insane gerrymandering yet, though. Click on RD 10, which was drawn for Bob Valihura, but is now represented by Dennis E. Williams. The district runs from the Kennett Pike to the Delaware River. First, a plea to Dennis Williams, please give up your dream of keeping Jack Markell in the district. LOSE the area west of Route 202. Your district will remain a swing district, so it makes sense to jettison as many of those chateau folks as possible. If you refuse, then Short and Heffernan should at least get the eastern tip of your district (say, to Valley Road) to make it less gerrymandered and to solidify their D numbers.
At this point, Short, Heffernan and Williams should all be on or near their number. They no doubt will have to undo the rampant dividing of communities that Wayne Smith did in Brandywine Hundred, but ultimately it should be a zero-sum game. The result: Short and Heffernan solidify Democratic districts, Williams remains at least as competitive as before in a swing district. I don’t think D’s should try to shore up the 10th much more than we have here since the effect would be to weaken their edge in the 6th and 7th.. The 6th and 7th remain two solid building blocks that both switched from R to D in the last 10 years. Make them more-or-less secure, and it’s difficult to see the R’s retaking the House any time soon.
Folks, we still have at least two more districts to lose to provide for district shifts to lower NCC and Sussex County. I propose that those districts come from the following: 11th (Lavelle), 12th (Hudson), 20th (Manolakos), 21st (Ramone), and 22nd (Miro). In case my theme is too subtle for you, all 5 have one thing in common: They’re currently held by R’s.
How do you make 2 districts disappear? Isn’t that impossible? Not at all. Let’s look at the math. It takes a minimum of 20,806 residents for a district. For two districts, that’s a minimum of 41,612. However, for purposes of this exercise, remember that each district has an allowable maximum population of 22,996. In other words, if we can get the population numbers for these districts down to 22,996 times three, a total of 68,988, we’ve got three districts instead of five. If my math is right, those five districts are at a current population of 95,179. Under my proposal, we are lopping off at least 75% of the population of Greg Lavelle’s existing district. Buh-bye, 13,854 more. Down to 81,325, just like that. In other words, 4 districts. There are D districts that need numbers that either directly abut these districts, or that can get numbers indirectly from them. And I count at least 15 ED’s (that’s an entire RD right there), not including any of Lavelle’s (which have already been accounted for) that most self-respecting D’s would LOVE to have. Take ’em. Or at least as many as you need. Gilligan (19) can use 3000 more, Barbieri (18) 2500, Osienski (24) 3000, Mulrooney 2500, and ta-da…Jaques 2000. These numbers could probably go a little higher if you move a district to its maximum allowable population. By moving population from the R districts to enable these D’s to make their numbers, the remaining districts are left with a population right around 68,000. Even if Dennis E. Williams excises his Chateau Country territory west of 202, as I think he should, the numbers can easily work to eliminate two R RD’s here.
Here’s the best part. Which two RD’s should go? I don’t care and neither should the D’s. Were I advising the D Caucus, I’d suggest that it simply give the geographical parameters to the R’s, tell them that they can craft 3 districts out of it, and let THEM fight it out. That way, if there are any complaints, it’s not with the D’s, it’s within the R’s own caucus. I think Ramone would go and either Miro or Manolakos, probably Miro. But let them decide.
Finally, a couple of words on Sussex County and what Pete Schwartzkopf might do. Demographics make it clear that eastern Sussex will get at least one, and maybe two, new districts. I would also not be shocked if one district in western Sussex disappears. Wayne Smith was able to carve out a western Sussex district at the expense of eastern Sussex by having all the central and western Sussex districts at the minimum required population levels and by having the eastern Sussex districts at the highest levels. I fully expect and hope that Pete will reverse that this time. After all, virtually all of the growth is in eastern Sussex. Add two districts there…and, as a result, Ruth Briggs King, Harvey Kenton, and/or David Wilson could well find out that ‘three into two won’t go’.
Bottom line: D’s lose a Wilmington district, R’s lose two upstate districts. D’s almost certainly gain two districts in southern NCC. D’s likely gain at least one and possibly two districts in Sussex County, and R’s could lose one. I think that”s pretty good and pretty safe.
I’ve left a lot out of this, but today’s the deadline to make my views known on redistricting to the House, at least until the May public meetings. Consider this my submission.
Feel free to ask me about this and/or the stuff I didn’t cover. I’m off today, and I’ve had lots of caffeine! John Tobin, start yer engine!
Tags: Delaware House of Representatives; Redistricting; El Somnambulo; Steve Tanzer
I would love to see Ruth Briggs-King and David Wilson both go. Put Ruth in Atkins’s district (she wouldn’t be able to beat him) and throw Wilson and Kenton in the same district. Create a safe district for Russ McCabe or another D.
I think the ‘safest’ Sussex D districts, not to mention the least reactionary, would be along the eastern coast. I’m sure that Pete will try to recreate the Schroeder district to the extent practicable.
In the long term, that’s where I’d like to see the new districts be.
Well, I do know that they are going to bring Dewey Beach back into the 14th (it’s now in the 38th).
One way to re slice the pie would be to move Atkins lines south of the indian River. There is precedent for this before 2000 long Neck and east Millsoro were in the 38th the rationale being water is contiguous. Hocker lives close enogh to the River that he could join John. The the could be made more fvorable for Democrat and Wallah another bigot exits stage left:) Now I know John voted wrong as well but he was voting his district. Hocker ignored his.
Thanks for this, ‘Bulo! This is exhaustive, but totally intriguing, reading. Great stuff here!
Thanks, Mike. However, why is it that I suspect the word ‘exhaustive’ was actually meant to be ‘exhausting’?
Joe: There’s nothing incumbents hate more than being placed in districts with other incumbents. No way that Atkins has an R drawn into his district. As I’ve said previously, D’s shouldn’t, and don’t have to, overreach. First, protect the majority that you already have.
Yes, exhausting. Definitely not exhaustive. There’s certainly much more to be said and you’re the one to say it!!
true enough i feel some guilt over the creaation of Hocker, however there is a lot of room to shift 38 to the east thereby making things less hospitable for Gerald if only the dems can produce a viable candidate. if drawn carefully i still think atkins could knock him off easily. in 2001 an effort was made to draw Shirley into Charlie West’s District but the R’s wussed out on that.It ended up being unnecessary.
I would focus, and I think Pete will focus on increasing chances in eastern Sussex while perhaps even shrinking the number of central/western Sussex districts by one. He’ll definitely take back the eastern portion of Briggs King’s district, and I think the numbers could enable him to consolidate her district, the Kenton district and the Wilson district into two districts.
I think it’s a mistake to focus specifically on individuals, and it’s better to focus on registration and potential for D pickups regardless of who may eventually surface. And eastern Sussex is where that potential is at.
Of course, I’m from New Castle County, so it’s equally possible I have no clue what I’m talking about.
when doing reapportionment i don’t think its possible to ignore the names. Dewey Beach was done to keep a secific person from being in the 14th. the drop in population in 39 has several possible D benefits as you can see. protection of incumbants is first followed by the creation of opportunty. If Russ McCabe can helped along with life being made difficult for Short, Wilson, King and Hocker all the better.
Don’t know if I agree that Adkins can beat Hocker . Focus on aligning things in Dems favor above Indian River inlet .Protect Pete and win “new” district in that area . Don’t worry about Hocker in 38th .Let him be .Maybe it will go to his head and he will run for Gov. or some higher office . In the 38th we will keep working with “new” retiree’s as they come into area from Washington and closing registration gap .In the meantime We will continue to raise funds to help other “worthy” candidates statewide .Hint to candidates: Don’t miss our PICNIC IN THE PARK on June 12th-Sunday.Funding is available.
Well, you’re creating opportunity by crafting the new eastern Sussex district(s).
However, you make a good point about Russ…IF that doesn’t compromise the goal of creating two new Democratic-friendly districts.
The idea of putting Adkins in with Hocker makes no sense, why would the Caucus risk it? They wouldn’t.
My best-case scenario includes doing away with an R incumbent’s district in central/western Sussex to create more D opportunity along the coast.
My meanderings mean next-to-nothing, however. Pete’s gonna draw the lines, and I think we’ll all like what we see.
Why the Democrats would do anything remotely kind or protective for Dennis E. Williams is beyond understanding. He has been a complete dud on policy and constituent services. He will face a primary challenger in 2012.
let me come in from left field/ivory tower here.
how about thinking about the voters? How about putting communities in the same district as a top priority, and ending the carving in/carving out nonsense.
keeping communities together yields a district with two incumbents in it, and they are unhappy? too freaking bad–get over yourself, incumbents. you serve the people, not vice versa.
[by the way ElS, I know that you have suggested being logical with communities in many cases in your wonderful overview. i just wanted to insert a new priority scheme.]
Fantastic job! Can’t wait for the public meetings.
A little bird told me that there could, quite possibly, be a Long Neck district wedged between the 41st and 14th.
From here on out it’s all speculation: There’s a few legislative hopefuls living in that area on both sides making it attractive for all involved, but wouldn’t be eligible because of Pete and Adkins.
However the lines are drawn, it makes it a very competitive district.
Pete takes Lewes and merges it into Rehoboth, sheds the western part into the new district. Keeps Pete strong. Georgetown takes some of the 36th and 37th which makes it a stronger GOP district.
Redraw the lines between Seaford and Bridgeville and Short is safe. The second new district goes in Kent County.
just for the record it’s aTkins. ES the fun here is we don’t draw and he does.
Question for BS why the F would anybody wanna make Short “safe”???? Second the new districts belong in Sussex.
Re the Short question. One way to open up opportunities for D’s is to stuff every R you can into certain districts you view as challenging at best. Also, stuff ’em up to the plus 5% number. For example, my proposal would cut two R districts in northern NCC. The remaining 3 districts would be ‘safer’ R districts, not b/c we’re protecting them, but rather b/c we’re putting the D election districts to better use in D or swing districts.
As to the carving up of communities, it’s generally-accepted redistricting practice that you DON’T carve them up. I worked on two senate redistrictings, and I think that we only divided up one (non-municipal) community into two. And that was only b/c we had two senators next to each other, both were right on their plus/minus number, and we simply couldn’t figure out any other way to do it.
By contrast, Wayne Smith divided up seven communities in his own RD last time, and did so in many other districts as well. I said then, and I repeat now, that had the D’s challenged the plan in court, I believe the plan would have been deemed unconstitutional.
No way that the D’s do anything even close to that this time around.
Sussex divides more naturally than say Brandywine Hundred. Having said that you make my point a couple R districts are ok but 4 current R’s should be in them:)
Wasit Indian field where you could not get out of the back of Development without going through another district? Cynic in me admires Wayne for those moves:)
Danny Short is going to run for Venables’ Senate seat anyway. Bank on it.
mmmmm maybe he coud get screwed out of that as well:) Short shrift:)
As someone who once analyzed running against both Short and Venables during my year of lunacy in the LPD, Short would be stupid to do so until Venables retires. His odds of winning go from 25/75 to 60/40 in his favor.
Unless they gerrymander him into Booth’s district. Not unfeasible. He lives within a half mile of the line.
Shorts no lock on Venables Senate seat. He will have a nasty primary from Phillips. A lot of excitement in the past about Marlene Elliott (former Roth staffer) and an outside chance Biff Lee would be interested too. All that before he would ever face a D in the general election.
Really enjoying the Sussex talk, since my record on predictions there is pathetic, and the comments here are really interesting.
Anybody from Kent County care to weigh in on what might happen there? I kinda saw it as fairly status quo, but YMMV.
I see Biff retiring first to make room for Phillips, Short waiting for Venables to retire, which makes room for Seaford’s County Councilman, Mike Vincent, to move up. The GOP’s been using the council and local town governments as their AAA farm teams, and Seaford is the core of it.
I was looking at it as a model to build the LPD.. but the idea of actually putting hard work in and building a candidate’s experience flew like a lead balloon.
I don’t think it’s as clear-cut as you do, Brian. Look for Venables to retire in 2012 – he’s done. But Biff’s not going to step down from the House seat voluntarily except for his brother Randy. That’s a family sinecure. And it’s kind of difficult to be a fire marshal and a legislator simultaneously.
In 2012, Vance will be in the middle of his term – he won’t have to give up his council seat to run. Vincent, up for re-election, would have to risk it. Look for Vincent to stay and Vance to try to step up.
Then again, who are the Democrats going to have run? They couldn’t even get anyone to run against Biff in November. They have no one on their western Sussex farm team except Jim Westhoff, who’s not going to be able to win Greenwood/Bridgeville unless Dave Wilson gets caught in bed with a goat. (Sorry, Jim.)
There is pressure currently being put on the Democrats to put Georgetown in its own rep district, instead of splitting it up, on the theory it would give power to the Hispanics. To the contrary, I think that would create a safe GOP district. If anyone with roots south of the border or a slight accent ever got uppity enough to run, the Republicans would come down on them with more force and fury than had ever been witnessed in Sussex before. And even among the Anglos, who was the last Democratic candidate you saw coming out of Georgetown? Mike Wyatt in 2008, who got crushed by Sam Wilson for the open county council seat. Ruth Briggs King would love that plan.
Any suburban lines should favor Hudson at the expense of Lavelle. Putting them in the same district would be just fine. She’s a valuable pro-choice vote; he’s a walking cliché. For same reasons, any boundaries that help Manolakos at the expense of Miro would be a public service.