Category Archives: Elections

Elections Have Consequences — Biden Agenda Edition

By tmess2 | Published October 24, 2021

It is a phrase that we repeatedly hear — typically by the majority as a justification for the unjustifiable, but elections do have consequences.  But it’s not just who wins, but how they win.  In many parliamentary countries, there is another common phrase a “working majority.”  And the basic concept is that it is rarely enough to win by one or two seats.  When you have a one or two seat majority, it only takes one or two members deciding to walk to cost the government the majority.  And that’s in a parliamentary system where members risk forcing a new election if they defect from the government to the minority.  In the United States, there is no threat of an immediate new election hanging over members’ heads to encourage the majority to stick together.  As a result, the margin required for a working majority is somewhat larger in the U.S.

And that’s the problem that the current Democratic majority is facing.  Currently, the Democrats have a 220-212 majority in the House (which will go up to 222-213 in January when all of the vacancies are filled).  That means a mere four (now or five in January) defections means that nothing can pass.  In the Senate, the Democrats do not have an actual majority.  Even including the two independents who normally vote with the Democrats, the Senate is a 50-50 tie.  Given the Senate filibuster rules, a 50-50 Senate can only pass reconciliation bills or confirm nominees, and even that requires all fifty members of the caucus to stick together at which point the Vice-President can break a tie.

The current mess on reconciliation and election reform is the result of the lack of a working majority.  Needing every vote in the Senate requires getting the agreement of every Senator.  Thus, each Senator can insist on concessions from the rest of the party.  (It is a little harder in the House, but a group of five or more members have the same leverage).  And to be clear, the leverage is not equal.  When you need every vote, the ones who want to do less have a negotiating advantage over those who want to do more.  The reality is that something is almost always better than nothing.  So the  “moderates” can tell the “progressives” that we are willing to vote for some increased funding for child care and clean energy and expanding Medicare but not for as much increased funding as you want, and the progressives have the option of accepting some funding for needed programs or not getting those programs at all.  The only real limit to the moderates leverage is that, when it comes to needing to cut funding, progressive can counter by trying to trade off programs that they want for programs that the moderates want that progressives do not see as particularly useful.  But that is very limited leverage.  Thus, at the end of the day, the current numbers give a lot of additional power to Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Senator Krysten Sinema of (suppoesedly) Arizona.  (The supposedly is that Senator Manchin’s positions flow from the politics of West Virginia and it is unlikely that Democrats could elect a more progressive Senator from West Virginia.  Senator Sinema’s positions on the other hand do not flow from Arizona’s politics as her fellow Senator from Arizona, Mark Kelly, who actually has to run in 2022, is not blocking current proposals.) Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives, Joe Biden, Senate | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Elections Have Consequences — Biden Agenda Edition

The German Election Result and What It Says About Europe

By tmess2 | Published October 3, 2021

Last Sunday, Germany held elections for the lower house of its parliament.  Given the mixed-member system that Germany uses, German elections are not immediately conclusive.  The results merely set the terms for the negotiations that will follow over the shape of the government.  But the election results do reflect the changes in Europe over the last 50 years.

The short version of the results is that the Social Democratic Party (the junior partner in the current government) made significant gains at the expense of the Christian Democratic/Social Union (the senior partner in the current government) and is now the largest party in parliament (206 seats vs. 196 seats).  The Green Party made significant gains to move from sixth place to third place (now at 118 seats).  The Free Democrats gained some seats but due to the big gains by the Greens stayed in fourth place (now at 92 seats).  The Alternative for Germany fell from third place to fifth place dropping eleven seats (now at 83 seats).  Finally, the Left lost about half of its seats to drop from fifth place to sixth place (now at 39 seats).  While the numbers have shifted, the essential facts of political life remain the same.  The only potential two-party majority is a grand union between the “Union” and the Social Democrats and a three-party coalition that features only one of the two largest party would require both the Greens and the Free Democrats (as the Left and the Alternative for the reasons noted below are not preferred options).

Hopping into the wayback machine, however, todays results would be unrecognizable to the German voter who voted in the 1980 election.  Back in 1980, West Germany was primarily three parties — the Union, the Social Democrats, and the Free Democrats.  At that time, the Free Democrats were essentially the balance in the center between the Union and the Social Democrats.  The Free Democrats had the power to decide who would form the government and used that power to keep either of the other two parties from shifting to far from center.  Over the 1980s, prior to unification, the Green Party formed and rivaled the Free Democrats for third party status. Continue Reading...

Also posted in National Security | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The German Election Result and What It Says About Europe

Election Backfires

By tmess2 | Published September 25, 2021

Last month, I mentioned three elections scheduled for September.  One of them — Germany scheduled for tomorrow — is a regular election at the expiration of the current parliamentary term.  Two of them were not.  In California, Republicans, thinking that his COVID policies made Governor Gavin Newsom vulnerable, pushed through a recall petition to force a recall election.  In Canada, the governing Liberal Party, thought that favorable polls gave them a chance of turning their plurality into an actual majority.

The votes are now in.  And both elections were a wash that mostly maintained the status quo.

In California, while early polls seemed to show a chance for the recall to succeed, the current vote totals are similar to the results of recent elections.  With approximately 12.5 million votes counted (and only around 450,000 votes remaining to be counted), slightly over 62% of the votes are against the recall.  The current counted votes are very similar to the final count from the 2018 election with the “no” votes being approximately 60,000 more votes that Governor Newsom got in 2018 and the “yes” votes being approximately 20,000 fewer votes than the Republican candidate got in 2018. Continue Reading...

Tagged , | Comments Off on Election Backfires

Redistricting — California

By tmess2 | Published August 8, 2021

California is a hard state to analyze redistricting for several reasons.

First, there is the sheer number of districts.  With 52 districts (down from 53) there are a lot of choices to make.

Second, besides the large population, you also have a very diverse population.  The state as a whole is a minority-majority state.  And there are enough Latino, African-American, and Asian-Americans that map makers have to consider whether it is possible to create influence districts (or even majority districts) for each of these groups. Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Redistricting — California

Redistricting — Illinois

By tmess2 | Published July 31, 2021

Illinois concludes our tour of the midwestern states that lost a seat.  Like New York, Illinois is dominated by one city (Chicago) and its suburbs.  Eleven districts are at least partially in Cook County (Chicago) and another two are partially in a county adjoining Cook County leaving five districts for “downstate.”

Illinois’s current map has an overwhelming number of split precincts.  The current map has four minority-majority district.  Of those four districts, two (First District and Second District) have African-American majorities, one (Seventh District) has an African-American plurality, and one has a Hispanic majority (Fourth District).

The current map has six solid Democratic districts, two safe Democratic districts, two lean Democratic districts, and one toss-up that favor the Democrats.  On the other side, Republicans have one solid district (Fifteenth District), one safe district (Eighteenth District), one lean district (Sixteenth District), and four toss-ups that favor the Republicans.  Right now, Democrats hold three of the five toss-up seats. Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Redistricting — Illinois

Redistricting — Michigan

By tmess2 | Published July 25, 2021

Michigan continues the series of states in the Great Lake Region that lost a seat in the House.  Like Ohio and Pennsylvania, the Republicans won control of the state in 2010 and tried to create a map that slants things in favor of the Republicans.  In response, voters in Michigan shifted responsibility to a bipartisan commission.  The process is somewhat complicated and the final maps will be reviewed by the court for compliance with standards set forth in the state constitution governing the process which includes a fairness requirement.

The current maps would clearly fail the fairness standard.  The three most lopsided districts are three solid Democratic districts (Twelfth District, Thirteenth District, and Fourteenth District) around Detroit which range from an expected Democratic vote of 64% in the Twelfth District to 79% in both the Thirteenth District and Fourteenth District.  The most Republican district in the state is the Tenth District (expected Republican vote of 61%).  As a result, the Democrats have an three solid districts and one lean district (Ninth District), and the Republicans have one solid district, one safe district (Fourth District), and three lean districts (First District, Second District, and Seventh District).  Of the remaining five districts, two are toss-ups that slightly favor the Democrats (Fifth District and Eleventh District) and three are toss-ups that slightly favor the Republicans (Third District, Sixth District, and Eighth District).  In short, the current map is an 8-6 map in favor of the Republicans even though the statewide numbers actually favor the Democrats.  Despite the map favoring the Republicans, the current delegation is actually a 7-7 split because the Democrats currently hold the Eight District.

Currently, Michigan has two districts with African-American majorities (the Thirteenth District and the Fourteenth District).  As noted above, as has often been the case when Republicans have drawn the maps, giving African-Americans a solid majority in districts often lead to districts that are packed with Democratic votes.  The task for those drawing the maps will be how to make the urban districts less packed while still protecting the influence of African-Americans in these districts. Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Redistricting — Michigan

Redistricting — Ohio

By tmess2 | Published July 18, 2021

Like Pennsylvania, Ohio is  a midwestern state that has lost a seat in the House and has an open Senate seat.  There are two key differences.  First, in Ohio, the governor is also a Republican.  Ohio voters have adopted some checks on the majority party ability to redistrict at will, but the majority can force through a map that will last for two cycles without any minority support.  Second, Democratic Representative Tim Ryan has already announced that he will be running for Senate.  While that allows the legislature to keep the remaining incumbents in separate districts, it does not mean that changing the maps in a way that keeps incumbents separate will be easy as incumbents do not always live in the center of their district.

Already, Ohio is a very gerrymandered state with some very weird map shapes.  As with the other states that lost a seat, most of the existing districts are short on voters with two exceptions — the Third District (Columbus) and the Twelfth District (the area to the north and east of Columbus in central Ohio).  Other than the Fifteenth District (the area to the south of Columbus) which is only 15,000 people short, the remaining thirteen districts are between 30,000 and 90,000 people short.  In particular, the five districts that adjoin the current Thirteenth District are a combined 330,000 short.  But as the current Thirteenth has just approximately 707,000 people, that will be around 370,000 people that those districts will have to kick to the rest of the state.  More significantly,  as in the rest of the state, the lines were carefully drawn to pack as many Democrats into the Democratic districts as possible.  The Eleventh District which stretches from Cleveland to Akron is carefully drawn so that the Democrat expected votes are around 80%.  While it borders the Thirteenth District, it can’t move too far east into the current Thirteenth without needing to shed Democratic voters into the Republican districts to the west.  And the Fourteenth District (northeastern Ohio) is a lean Republican district that really can’t afford to give Republicans to the Eleventh District or take in the Democrats around Akron, Ravenna, or Youngstown.  In short, once again, the Republicans are going to be very carefully looking precinct by precinct as they carve up the Thirteenth District and make the necessary shifts of the districts toward the eastern part of the state.

Trying to draw a more favorable map for Democrats, I began by doing two things:  First, there are three counties that are large enough to fully contain a district — Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), Hamilton County (Cincinnati), and Franklin County (Columbus).  In the current map, only Franklin contain fully contains a district (Third District).  So I kept Cincinnati intact (which would force the two Republican representatives from the First and Second District into a primary) and drew a map that had eastern and central Hamilton County around Cincinnati in the First District and kept the Eleventh District in Cuyahoga County.  That flipped the First District from a toss-up favoring the Republicans to a lean Democratic District.  It did lower the African-American population in the Eleventh District  Overall, African-Americans are still the largest population group but they are only a plurality and among the voting age population, there are slightly more whites than African-Americans.  African-Americans should still have the majority of votes in the Democratic primary, and the district is solidly Democratic; so African-Americans should be able to elect their preferred candidate.  These shifts force the Second District eastward and northward (taking some area from the Fifteenth District). Continue Reading...

Also posted in Cleveland, House of Representatives | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Redistricting — Ohio

Redistricting — Pennsylvania

By tmess2 | Published July 14, 2021

By the end of the process, redistricting in Pennsylvania may come down to which of two prior district maps is the baseline for the new maps.  Currently, the Republicans control the state legislature while there is a Democratic governor.  While I will leave it to those on the ground in Pennsylvania to discuss what the chances are for a compromise map, if the legislature is unable to pass a map that the governor will sign (as happened in 2018), the responsibility for drawing the new map will fall on the courts.

In drawing new maps, courts tend to use the existing map as a baseline.  Because Pennsylvania is losing a seat, there will need to be significant adjustments, but courts are likely to be somewhat neutral as far as which party benefits from the changes.  But the issue is which map is the starting point.  In 2011, when Republicans controlled everything, they drew a very partisan map.  The Pennsylvania courts struck down those maps on state law grounds in 2018.  The interim maps drawn by the courts are still in effect due to the failure of the legislature to come up with a new map.  Because the 2018 maps are more neutral, Democrats would benefit if the courts start with the 2018 maps.  For this reason, it would make sense for Democrats to file a preemptive case in state court.  Simply put, the state courts are more likely to start with the 2018 maps as the U.S. Supreme Court has held that, in drawing remedial maps, federal courts should start with the last legislatively drawn map and make only the changes needed to remedy the violations.

Besides the general issues of which district(s) will be split in two (or three) to balance out the rest of the state, there are two other matters which could impact the lines.  The first of these matters is the race for the U.S. Senate.  As of now, no member of Congress has entered the race for Senate.  There are a handful of House seats that are, at least on paper, swing seats.  The individuals holding those seats have the decision of whether they want to continue to have to fight every two years to hold those seats or if they want to take the chance at winning the Senate seat.  While a good incumbent can outperform their party in their district, the First, Seventh, Eighth, and Seventeenth are swing seats that slightly favor the Democrats by margins of 2.8% to 6.9% with Democrats currently holding three of the four seats.  Representative Brian Fitzgerald who somehow manages to hold the First District for the Republicans and Representative Matt Cartwright in the Eighth District and Representative Connor Lamb in the Seventeenth District for the Democrats all have to wonder how long their luck will continue to hold in redrawn districts.  And it would be much easier for those drawing the maps if they don’t have to choose which two incumbents to force into the same race. Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Redistricting — Pennsylvania

Redistricting — New York

By tmess2 | Published July 10, 2021

Politics in New York can be divided into four regions:  Long Island (Nassau County and Suffolk County), New York City, the New York City suburbs (Westchester County, Rockland County, Orange County, and Putnam County), and the rest of the state.  It’s not that the rest of the state is a coherent region.  It’s just that New York City is a barrier between Long island and the rest of the state.  And the southeastern corner of the state is a funnel leading down to New York City.  Once you get north of Orange County and Putnam County, the state quickly widens.

And this geographic reality is reflected in the current maps.  The First District is entirely within Suffolk County at the eastern end of Long Island.  The Second District is contained within Nassau County and Suffolk County.   The Fourth District is entirely within Nassau County.   The Third District spans from Suffolk County to Queens County.  The Fifth District contains parts of Nassau County and Queen County.  The Sixth District, the Seventh District, the Eighth District, the Ninth District, the Tenth District, the Eleventh District, the Twelfth District, the Thirteenth District, the Fourteenth District, and the Fifteenth District are entirely contained within New York City.  The Sixteenth District is partially in New York City and partly in Westchester County.  The Seventeenth District contains part of Westchester County and all of Rockland County.  The Eighteen District contains the rest of Westchester County, Orange County, Putnam County, and part of Duchess County.  The remaining nine districts gradually spread out as you head north and west from the New York City suburbs.  Simply put, there are a lot of very narrow districts in the New York City area leaving little room for the districts north of New York City to reach into New York City to gain Democrats and for the New York City districts to reach north and gain Republicans. This geography is not good for Democrats as New York City is very, very blue.  In essence, the Democrats have self-packed themselves into the New York City districts, and the Republicans only have to do a little bit of cracking in the rest of the state.

Under the current maps, the best districts for Republicans are around 60-40.  Meanwhile, the Democrats hold eight seats in which they are expected to get over 80% of the vote.  That is a lot of wasted votes.  In short, political geography has created a “natural” pro-Republican gerrymander, and the struggle for Democrats is how to undo this gerrymander. Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Redistricting — New York

Redistricting — West Virginia

By tmess2 | Published July 5, 2021

Redistricting in West Virginia will probably be a very simple process.  Currently, all three districts run east to west with the First District being in the northern part of the state, the Second District in the central part of the state, and the Third District being in the southern part of the state.  Even though the Second District has the most population, it will probably be split in two.  The exact lines will probably depend on influence of the current members.  Obviously, both of the incumbents in the First (the most senior member of the delegation) and the Third (the most junior of the delegation) would rather not get the incumbent in the Second as  a primary opponent.  and the incumbent in the Second (which reaches to the northeastern corner) would prefer to split West Virginia into an eastern district and a western district which would leave him alone in the eastern district and put the two other representatives into the western district.  All three representatives live on the edge of the state (First in the northwest, Second in the northeast, and Third in the southwest) so it is not that hard to draw the lines in a way that determines which two of the incumbents will have to run against each other.

But at the end of the day, the exact lines will only matter to the people who want to represent West Virginia in Congress.  We are long gone from the days of Robert Byrd when Democrats were a dominant force in West Virginia.  At the present time, there just are not enough Democrats in the state, and they are too scattered around the edges to draw a toss-up district.  Both districts will be around R +20.

When I tried to draw the most favorable map that I could for Democrats in West Virginia, I still ended up with that district being around R+14.  And to get that district that linked all of the Democratic precincts in West Virginia, I basically had to draw a  horseshoe with the Democratic voters packed into the horseshoe and the rest of the state filling in that horseshoe.  In other words, a map that looked awful and still did not give Democrats a competitive district. Continue Reading...

Also posted in House of Representatives | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Redistricting — West Virginia