Gerrymandering in Wisconsin PLSC 111 Discussion Sections March 19, 2018

Background In 2010, Republicans sweep Wisconsin They win the governor’s office Majorities in State Senate (19-14) and Assembly (59-40) Assembly districts are nested in Senate Districts Therefore total control of government Act 43, which is the redistricting of the General Assembly is passed and signed by Governor Walker Goes into effect in 2012 General election (not for 2011-12 recalls) The current makeup of the Assembly is 63R, 36D

Litigation by Democrats A group of plaintiffs supported by Democrats file a federal lawsuit challenging the Assembly map as a partisan gerrymander The Supreme Court in three past cases has said that partisan gerrymandering may be impermissible but has never been able to agree on a test to measure it Legal theory is that the harm is to individuals Same argument as is made by McDonald and Best But plaintiffs are using a different measurement of vote dilution The Efficiency Gap

The 2016 Assembly Elections

Neutral Mapping Algorithm Developed by Daniel Magleby and Daniel Moseson The program uses Census block level data to draw hundreds and thousands of neutral maps across a state They are then aggregated into districts Overlaid onto precincts One can then look at the results of the maps produced to see if a neutral mapping process can produce the results observed

The Efficiency Gap Stephanopoulos and McGhee This looks at “wasted votes” Lost votes and surplus votes Seat Margin – (2 × Vote Margin) To get the efficiency gap number= Sum of column G/Sum of Columns H and I H I A B C D E F G District Dem Votes GOP Votes Win Party Lost Dem Votes Lost GOP Votes Surplus Dem Votes Surplus GOP Votes Wasted Dem Votes (A+C) Wasted GOP Votes (B+D) Net Wasted Votes (E-F) 1 16259 16414 R 78 16181 2 11805 10025 890 -9136

More on the efficiency gap The authors say that for state legislative districts, the impermissible level of bias is 8% It is two seats for Congressional districts They are not entirely clear why they decided on 8%, but it seems to be related to observations of maps from previous decades Turnout can effect this There can also be an issue because more votes are lost than surplus It can produce false positives and false negatives In Iowa, it shows the same map to be a Democratic and Republican gerrymander based on what races one looks at

Test of McDonald/Best Targets harm to voters rather than parties Looks at statewide races rather than the seats results for Assembly Takes away the problems with uncontested seats, incumbency advantage Comparison of the mean versus the median seat Differences indicate bias against the voters of one party Not effected by turnout levels Concerned with violation of majority rule Differential Packing

Is there a natural gerrymander going in Wisconsin? The experts hired by the state have alleged that Democratic votes in the state are concentrated in Milwaukee and Madison and thus any map would be biased in favor of Republicans Note: red and blue are reversed from what we use in this map Red: Dem Blue: GOP Obama win by 7.03% of two party vote

Observed Efficiency Gap vs Neutral Maps President November 2012 Obama v. Romney Race Observed Neutral 2012 Governor Recall 11.84 10.56 2012 President 14.98 2.26 2014 Governor 10.08 9.92

Efficiency Gap for Governor Elections Governor Recall June 2012 Walker v. Barrett Governor Election November 2014 Walker v. Burke

All Elections- Efficiency Gap

Application of McDonald/Best Three elections- Difference in mean-median of the two party share of the vote 2012 Governor Recall (June) 6.36 2012 President (November) 5.21 2014 Governor 5.82 All three show substantial bias in favor of Republicans We will have data later for other statewide races

But under neutral mapping Neutral mapping decreases the bias levels in favor of Republicans But still shows some bias There is a natural bias against Democrats, but not at the levels we observe in the current map Race Observed Neutral Result 2012 Governor Recall 6.36 2.14 Walker (R) +6.84 2012 President 5.21 3.85 Obama (D) +7.03 2014 Governor 5.82 3.16 Walker (R) +5.74

But how much bias President November 2012 Obama v. Romney We can show that by drawing 992 neutral maps that one cannot generate these levels of bias neutrally These frequency graphs show the difference between the mean and median in the neutral maps of what is observed The dashed line is the actual maps currently in place

Bias for Governor Elections Governor Recall June 2012 Walker v. Barrett Governor Election November 2014 Walker v. Burke

Bias- All Races

All Elections- Efficiency

All Elections- Observed

Where does the case stand now? A three judge panel of the Western District of Wisconsin found this map to be an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander Set up a three part test Partisan intent Partisan effect No legitimate grounds to explain these Judge Greisbach dissented and exposed problems with the Efficiency Gap The case was appealed to the Supreme Court Oral arguments heard on October 3 Plaintiffs did not defend the EG in Court, and it was skewed by Roberts and Alito Kennedy was rather quiet The Court recently decided to take up a Maryland redistricting case this term too

This brief

Why does this matter? If the Court rules in a way that overturns either Wisconsin or Maryland, it could overturn many other maps across the country Pennsylvania map currently under attack in state court Including all three maps in Indiana Also, since so many maps are biased, it means in 2018 Dems need to win about 54-55% of the two party vote to win a bare majority in the House

In Conclusion We see that under both of these tests that Democrats are disadvantaged as their votes are weighted unequally due to packing The McDonald/Best test is a better measure than the efficiency gap It is consistent in its results The efficiency gap can show gerrymanders when they may not exist Or exaggerate their effects

Thank You!

Writing Assignment Pick Two 1a) Based on the Thursday lecture, where do you think prisoners should be counted for purposes of redistricting where they are incarcerated or where they are from? Why do you choose your option? OR 1b) In Pennsylvania, the State Supreme Court declared the Congressional district lines as violating the PA Constitution. The result of this was that the Court redrew the lines themselves. Do you support or oppose taking away the power of redistricting from legislative bodies and giving them to some other body such as a court or independent/citizen commission? Why or why not? 2) Do you think that the Wisconsin Assembly is gerrymandered in favor of Republicans? Why do you come to the conclusion that you make?