About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
 William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
New Hampshire Labor News
Chaz Proulx: Right Wing Watch
Defending New Hampshire Public Education

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes

Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-Gov
- Maggie Hassan
- Jackie Cilley
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

A Partisan Analysis of the Senate Redistricting Plan

by: William Tucker

Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 06:00:00 AM EST

Thursday, the Senate Internal Affairs Committee released its redistricting plan for the 24 state Senate districts. To help understand the electoral implications of the plan, I've compared the Partisan Voting Index (PVI) for the proposed districts to that of the the current districts. (See the New Hampshire Partisan Voting Index (PVI) for a discussion of the Cook PVI and methodology.)

Observers from Rep. Steve Vaillancourt to Paul Twomey have said this plan could have been a lot worse for Democrats. Nevertheless, the proposal clearly improves Republican electoral chances by concentrating Democratic votes in current Democratic strongholds. Four of the five districts with seats held by Democrats today will become even more Democratic under this plan. The fifth Democratic seat, held by Sen. Lou D'Allesandro, is unchanged -- despite rumors that it would be targeted for a Republican takeover.

Meanwhile, of the 16 Republican incumbents seeking reelection, nine will benefit from a more Republican-leaning electorate and five will run for reelection in districts with exactly the same make-up as before. The big winners are Sen. Fenton Groen, whose district will be four points more Republican, Sens. Russell Prescott and Bob Odell (five points more Republican) and Sen. Nancy Stiles (seven points more Republican).

The proposed plan will have a public hearing Wednesday at 1:00 PM in LOB 205/207. The Senate will likely vote to adopt the plan on January 25. A district-by-district analysis follows below the fold.
William Tucker :: A Partisan Analysis of the Senate Redistricting Plan

SENATE DISTRICT 1
Incumbent: Sen. John Gallus (R-Berlin)
Current PVI: D+4, Proposed PVI: D+3
Adds Bath (R+2), Benton (R+10), Easton (D+13), Landaff (R+3), Monroe (R+10), Hadley's Purchase, Thornton (R+1), Woodstock (D+6). Removes Albany (D+8), Bartlett (D+7), Bean's Purchase, Hale's Location (R+25), Hart's Location (D+4), Jackson (D+12) Shelburne (EVEN), Waterville Valley (D+8).

SENATE DISTRICT 2
Incumbent: Sen. Jeanie Forrester (R-Meredith)
Current PVI: D+2, Proposed PVI: D+1
Adds Andover (D+4), Danbury (R+4), Grafton (EVEN), Hill (R+3) Salisbury (R+3), Tilton (EVEN). Removes Bath (R+2), Benton (R+10), Canaan (D+8), Easton (D+13), Holderness (D+4), Landaff (R+3), Lyme (D+21), Monroe (R+10), Thorton (R+1) Woodstock (D+6).

SENATE DISTRICT 3
Incumbent: Sen. Jeb Bradley (R-Wolfeboro)
Current PVI: R+1, Proposed PVI: EVEN
Adds Albany (D+8), Bean's Purchase, Bartlett (D+7), Freedom (R+4), Hale's Location (R+25), Hart's Location (D+4), Holderness (D+4), Jackson (D+12), Shelburne (EVEN), Waterville Valley (D+8). Removes Farmington (EVEN), Freedom (R+4), Milton (EVEN).

SENATE DISTRICT 4
Incumbent: Sen. Jim Forsythe (R-Strafford) *Not seeking reelection
Current PVI: R+4, Proposed PVI: D+9
Adds Barrington (D+2), Dover (D+11), Rollingsworth (D+7), Somersworth (D+8). Removes Alton (R+12), Barnstead (R+4), Belmont (R+4), Gilford (R+2), Gilmanton (R+2), Laconia (R+2), New Durham (R+4), Strafford (EVEN), Tilton (EVEN). 

SENATE DISTRICT 5
Incumbent: Sen. Matthew Houde (D-Plainfield) 
Current PVI: D+13, Proposed PVI: D+16
Adds Canaan (D+8), Charlestown (D+8), Claremont (D+7), Lyme (D+21). Removes Andover (D+4), Croydon (R+9), Danbury (R+4), Franklin (D+3), Grafton (EVEN), Grantham (D+7), Hill (R+3), Springfield (R+2) Wilmot (D+11).

SENATE DISTRICT 6
Incumbent: Sen. Fenton Groen (R-Rochester)
Current PVI: D+3, Proposed PVI: R+1 
Adds Alton (R+12), Farmington (EVEN), Gilmanton (R+2), Milton (EVEN), New Durham (R+4). Removes Barrington (D+2), Madbury (D+8), Nottingham (R+2), Somersworth (D+8).

SENATE DISTRICT 7
Incumbent: Sen. Andy Sanborn (R-Henniker)
Current PVI: D+1, Proposed PVI: R+1
Adds Belmont (R+7), Franklin (D+3), Gilford (R+5), Laconia (R+2). Removes Antrim (D+3), Bennington (EVEN), Bradford (D+5), Deering (EVEN), Francestown (D+1), Hancock (D+10), Harrisville (D+20), Henniker (D+7), Hillsborough (EVEN), Nelson (D+15), Salisbury (R+3), Warner (D+6), Weare (R+8), Windsor (R+1).    

SENATE DISTRICT 8
Incumbent: Sen. Bob Odell (R-Lempster)
Current PVI: D+5, Proposed PVI: EVEN
Adds Antrim (D+3), Bennington (EVEN), Bradford (D+5), Croydon (R+9), Deering (EVEN), Francestown (D+1), Grantham (D+7), Hillsborough (EVEN), Springfield (R+2), Stoddard (D+2), Unity (EVEN), Weare (R+8), Wilmot (D+11), Windsor (R+1). Removes Alstead (D+9), Charlestown (D+8), Claremont (D+7), Gilsum (D+2), Roxbury (D+15), Sullivan (D+4), Walpole (D+10), Westmoreland (D+9).

SENATE DISTRICT 9
Incumbent: Sen. Raymond White (R-Bedford) *Not seeking reelection
Current PVI: R+7, Proposed PVI: R+2
Adds Dublin (D+9), Fitzwilliam (D+4), Hancock (D+10), Jaffrey (D+1), Peterborough (D+12), Richmond (D+6), Sharon (D+12), Temple (D+3), Troy (D+5). Removes Merrimack (R+4).

SENATE DISTRICT 10
Incumbent: Sen. Molly Kelly (D-Keene)
Current PVI: D+13, Proposed PVI: D+14
Adds Alstead (D+11), Harrisville (D+20), Gilsum (D+2), Nelson (D+15), Roxbury (D+15), Sullivan (D+4), Walpole (D+10), Westmoreland (D+9). Removes Dublin (D+9), Fitzwilliam (D+4), Richmond (D+6), Troy (D+5).

SENATE DISTRICT 11
Incumbent: Sen. Peter Bragdon (R-Milford)
Current PVI: EVEN, Proposed PVI: R+2
Adds Merrimack (R+4). Removes Greenville (D+2), Jaffrey (D+1), New Ipswich (R+16), Peterborough (D+12), Rindge (R+3), Sharon (D+12), Temple (D+3).

SENATE DISTRICT 12
Incumbent: Sen. Jim Luther (R-Hollis)
Current PVI: EVEN, Proposed PVI: R+2
Adds Greenville (D+2), New Ipswich (R+16), Rindge (R+3). Removes Nashua Ward 9 (D+2). 

SENATE DISTRICT 13
Incumbent: Sen. Gary Lambert (R-Nashua) *Not seeking reelection 
Current PVI: D+7, Proposed PVI: D+6
Adds Nashua Ward 9 (D+2).

SENATE DISTRICT 14
Incumbent: Sen. Sharon Carson (R-Londonderry)
Current PVI: R+6, Proposed PVI: R+6
No change.

SENATE DISTRICT 15
Incumbent: Sen. Sylvia Larsen (D-Concord)
Current PVI: D+10, Proposed PVI: D+11
Adds Henniker (D+7), Warner (D+6). Removes Pembroke (EVEN).

SENATE DISTRICT 16
Incumbent: Sen. David Boutin (R-Hooksett)
Current PVI: R+2,  Proposed PVI: R+2
No change.

SENATE DISTRICT 17
Incumbent: Sen. John Barnes (R-Raymond)
Current PVI: R+6, Proposed PVI: R+3
Adds Barnstead (R+4), Pembroke (EVEN), Nottingham (R+1), Strafford (EVEN). Removes Brentwood (R+5), Chester (R+11), Danville (R+8), Fremont (R+8), Sandown (R+9).

SENATE DISTRICT 18
Incumbent: Sen. Tom De Blois (R-Manchester)
Current PVI: R+2,  Proposed PVI: R+2
No change.

SENATE DISTRICT 19
Incumbent: Sen. Jim Rausch (R-Derry)
Current PVI: R+7,  Proposed PVI: R+7
No change.

SENATE DISTRICT 20
Incumbent: Sen. Lou D'Allesandro (D-Manchester)
Current PVI: EVEN,  Proposed PVI: EVEN
No change.

SENATE DISTRICT 21
Incumbent: Sen. Amanda Merrill (D-Durham)
Current PVI: D+12, Proposed PVI: D+16
Adds Madbury (D+8), Newfields (R+1), Newington (R+4), Newmarket (D+12), Portsmouth (D+18). Removes Dover (D+11), Epping (D+1), Rollingsford (D+7).

SENATE DISTRICT 22
Incumbent: Sen. Chuck Morse (R-Salem)
Current PVI: R+7,  Proposed PVI: R+7
No change.

SENATE DISTRICT 23
Incumbent: Sen. Russell Prescott (R-Kingston)
Current PVI: D+3, Proposed PVI: R+2
Adds Brentwood (R+5), Chester (R+11), Danville (R+8),  Epping (D+1), Fremont (R+8), Sandown (R+9). Removes Kensington (R+3), Newfields (R+1), Newmarket (D+12), Newton (R+3), Seabrook (R+2), South Hampton (R+1), Stratham (D+1).

SENATE DISTRICT 24
Incumbent: Sen.Nancy Stiles (R-Hampton)
Current PVI: D+6,  Proposed PVI: R+1
Adds Kensington (R+3), Newton (R+3), Seabrook (R+2), South Hampton (R+1), Stratham (D+1). Removes Newington (R+4), Portsmouth (D+18).
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

A Partisan Analysis of the Senate Redistricting Plan | 18 comments
The Changes (0.00 / 0)
To Distrits 1 and 3 make sense geographically. I live in Bartlett and I don't even remember seeing Gallus' signs last election cycle much less actually see him campaign here.  All our neighbors were in Bradley's district and he does/did come to Conway frequently. I was shocked to see that Waterville Valley was in District 1, I'll bet Gallus has never campaigned there. This might be the one good thing the NH GOP has done recently, but I can't speak for the rest of the new map.
How do you compute your PVI? (0.00 / 0)

I have seen two other analyses of these and the house districts and both were framed in terms of a percentage, not a whole number, so I am curious as to the differences in method and whether or not they are capturing different information.

(Keep it simple or you will lose me!)

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

PVI (4.00 / 1)
PVI is a standard measure originally developed by Charlie Cook to compare how a congressional district votes relative to the nation as a whole. It compares a district's voting results from the previous two presidential elections with the national results. I simply apply this formula to local results.

The resulting index indicates the number of percentage points by which the district's vote exceeded the national average. For example, a D+2 PVI means the district's Democratic vote in the last two presidential elections was approximately 53.3% compared to the national average of 51.3%.

"Politics ain't beanbag" - Finley Peter Dunne

[ Parent ]
Thanks. (0.00 / 0)


"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  
[ Parent ]
Population Differences? (0.00 / 0)
Cook's index is instructive in looking at single district trends, but how do you account for population differences in multi-town districts? In District 21, adding Newmarket (D+12) and subtracting Dover (D+11) seems like a gain for the Democratic nominee. But Dover cast (roughly)13,000 votes in 2008 while Newmarket reported 3,500. The Dover deficit is more than made up in Portsmouth, of course, but unless the PVI totals are weighted by relative population...
[ Parent ]
Methodology (0.00 / 0)
The PVI is calculated using the total votes cast in the district (not by averaging the PVI for each town) so it is automatically weighted as you describe.

"Politics ain't beanbag" - Finley Peter Dunne
[ Parent ]
Bring On The Court (4.00 / 1)
Anyone who has ever been to the seacoast, never mind lives here, knows how insane it is to separate Portsmouth from New Castle, Rye, and Greenland.

Portsmouth is the hub, the only reason to cut it off is blatantly political, there is no possible other explanation.

To the Supreme Court!!


No'm Sayn?

Bring on the court? (0.00 / 0)

On what basis?

"Blatantly political" wont suffice or else every redistricting since 1792 would be out the window.

You have to have a federal or state constitutional violation or a violation of the Voting Rights Act.

The numbers here are within a 10% deviation (the normal standard).


"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

[ Parent ]
What a Crummy Process (4.00 / 1)
We need the amendment you spoke of to take the politics out of this. Communities of interest do not really change much over time.

Just be cause one can find different ways to draw boundaries around 54k people does not mean you should draw different boundaries around 54k people.

While my favorite District 10 as proposed is even more Dem. It would be a more perfect "community of interest" wise as:

Chesterfield 3604
Fitzwilliam 2396
Gilsum 813
Hinsdale 4046
Keene 23409
Marlborough 2063
Richmond 1155
Roxbury 229
Sullivan  677
Surry 732
Swanzey 7230
Troy 2145
Westmoreland 1874
Winchester 4341

Total        54714
Goal        54853
Difference  139

(Removes Dublin, Adds Roxbuy, Sullivan, Westmoreland)

As it stands now Richmond, Troy and Fitzwilliam will be in one Senate District and they will send their kids to school, and shop/work/play in another.

Richmond to Bedford what a joke...

Hope >> Fear





Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.

[ Parent ]
Doesn't matter (0.00 / 0)
Burt, blatant party politics in and of itself does not provide a constitutional basis to overturn a district plan. If blatant party politics means diluting on the basis of a protected class such as race, that is different. I don't think you are going to find anyone to take this case to any court on the basis of Portsmouth being separated from New Castle, Rye and Greenland. Manchester should consist of two senate districts. Instead, it is part of three districts, and with Republican towns added to each one.  That makes even less sense than splitting Portsmouth off from New Castle. But it has been that way for years.

Winning has consequences, and winning in redistricting years has major consequences.    



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

[ Parent ]
2002? (0.00 / 0)
My brain may still be addled by lingering pneumonia, but it seems to me that ten years ago when the Dems took the R plan to court, the deviation was not at issue. I had thought while there were some districts more out than others, overall the numbers for the R plan had worked.

Correct me please!


No'm Sayn?

[ Parent ]
2002? (0.00 / 0)
My brain may still be addled by lingering pneumonia, but it seems to me that ten years ago when the Dems took the R plan to court, the deviation was not at issue. I had thought while there were some districts more out than others, overall the numbers for the R plan had worked.

Correct me please!


No'm Sayn?

[ Parent ]
Correction (0.00 / 0)
Senate District 12 also adds Greenville (D+2) and Rindge (R+3).
Thanks (0.00 / 0)
I made the correction.

"Politics ain't beanbag" - Finley Peter Dunne
[ Parent ]
District 9 & the new suburban majority (4.00 / 1)
When I was a New Hampshire resident, I was registered to vote in Bedford. My mother lived in Manchester and I split my time between there and my father's house in Bedford. During that time, I had the pleasure of writing letters to and voting against Sen. Sheila Roberge on three occasions, though none of my letter-writing or vote-casting seemed to do much good.

While Bedford is still overwhelming Republican and the new District 9 still leans Republican and has a PVI R+2, it's a big improvement over the R+7 (previously tied with Districts 19 & 22 for most Republican). In the right year, it seems slightly more likely that I could see my former hometown represented by a Democratic senator for the first time in my life, though I'm not sure how likely that is.

It seems that the district will probably still be dominated by suburban Republicans. In a primary, the more conservative, anti-government Republicans in Bedford will likely far outnumber the perhaps more traditional Peterson-types of the Monadnock region. That may make independents in the western part of District 9 more likely to vote for the Democratic candidate. In reality, I fear it may also mean that the people of heavily Democratic towns like Dublin and Peterborough will be represented by a suburban Republican.

I am even more disappointed with the idea of a largely suburban town heavily linked to Manchester and Boston being lumped in with rural towns, as I don't see how a single senator can represent their disparate priorities. Splitting Bedford and Merrimack effectively creates a second, suburban-dominated district between Manchester and Nashua at the further expense of the interests of cities and rural towns.

Under the current plan, I anecdotally count six districts as being strongly suburban-dominated (Districts 9, 11, 14, 16, 19 & 22) with an additional five(Districts 12, 18, 20, 23 & 24) slightly less suburban. Suburbanites deserve representation as much as urban and rural voters, and some of the districts (eg: 14, 19 & 22) are appropriately nearly entirely suburban. I consider only one (District 13) to be strongly urban-dominated, while several others (two alone in Manchester) could have been drawn to benefit urban voters.

Splitting Manchester and Nashua into districts shared and potentially dominated by suburban interests, and splitting adjacent suburbs into districts where they may far outweigh distant rural towns, could unfairly tilt as many as half the senate seats in favor of the narrow interests of wealthy towns more connected to Boston and 128 than Concord, the White Mountains or New Hampshire's historic mill cities. Given the dominance of more conservative Republican transplants from other states in those towns, I don't see how this could be a coincidence.

Moderate Bedford Dem (4.00 / 2)
A Moderate Dem who could keep things close in Bedford could have a good shot at winning this east-west snake of a district.  

Hope >> Fear





Create a free Blue Hampshire account and join the conversation.
[ Parent ]
Is there an actual drawing of this plan anywhere? n/t (0.00 / 0)


"We now know that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob." - FDR
Map (0.00 / 0)
Link

"Politics ain't beanbag" - Finley Peter Dunne
[ Parent ]
A Partisan Analysis of the Senate Redistricting Plan | 18 comments

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox