State Supreme Court Releases Congressional Maps

The state Supreme Court released the new Congressional Map for Pennsylvania after the state Senate and House, and Governor Tom Wolf were unable to agree on a new map.

The Supreme Court’s map made major changes from the map they ruled unconstitutional, including reordering the districts.  

The new maps will likely face challenges in federal courts by the GOP.

Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick would be in the new 1st district.  Congressmen Brendan Boyle would be in the new 2nd district and Congressman Dwight Evans in the new 3rd district.  The new 4th, and 5th districts do not have incumbents running for re-election who live in the newly drawn lines.  The 6th district would still be represented by Congressman Ryan Costello.  

The Lehigh Valley, the new 7th district, gets its own seat in the redraw and would be an open seat.  Congressman Matt Cartwright would be in the new 8th district.  The new 9th would be an open seat with no incumbent living in the new lines.  The new 10th district would be represented by Congressman Scott Perry.  

The new 11th district would have Congressman Lloyd Smucker as the incumbent.  The new 12th district would have Congressman Tom Marino as the incumbent.  The 13th and 14th districts would be open seats.   The new 15th district has Congressman Glenn Thompson as the incumbent.  

The 16th has Congressman Mike Kelly as the incumbent.  The 17th has Congressman Keith Rothfus.  And the 18th has incumbent Congressman Mike Doyle as the current incumbent.  

The two candidates in the special election for the current 18th district live in separate districts under the new map, Democrat Conor Lamb lives in the new 17th district, and Republican Rick Saccone in the new 18th district.  The results of the special election will determine which of the two new districts has two incumbents facing each other in the election.

You can view the map below.

And here is an interactive version of the districts overlaid on Google Maps. Credit to Kerrin Garripoli of Ceisler Media. Twitter: @kerripoli

February 19th, 2018 | Posted in Congress, Front Page Stories, Redistricting Watch, Top Stories | 120 Comments

120 thoughts on “State Supreme Court Releases Congressional Maps”

  1. David Diano says:

    ATTENTION DEM CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES

    My statewide voter database system is NOW online and updated with the NEW CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS (and I’m open for business). BTW, for the 18th congressional, I’ve got both the new, and the old district separately mapped if the Lamb campaign is interested.

    The price is $250/month for the male candidates and $195/month for the women (due to 78-cents on the dollar).

    Petitions start Tuesday. With the data integrated, I’ve got not only street lists, but the registration counts, and turnout performance stats for each district.

    Caveat: It’s only 99% (not 100%) perfect, because I can’t do the split-precincts until the State Dept official update (so I just picked the dominant congressional district for the whole precinct). Most of the Philly wards are full wards, because I didn’t have the breakdown for any that were split.

    I updated a spreadsheet with the 9,200 precincts and rebuilt my system, overlaying the new congressional district numbers.

    (If someone had gotten me the legislative description text, I would have had this done two days ago.)

    When the state dept finally releases their official dump/snapshot, I’ll update with theirs instead of my overlay, and pick up the new precinct splits.

    For users of VoteBuilder and NationBuilder wondering why one person (by himself) beat them to the punch, it’s pretty simple. I’ve got no bureaucracy and I know that 99% is good enough and useful for everyone, until that last 1% is available.

    1. A says:

      this is spam and should not be allowed on here

      1. David Diano says:

        No. It’s not spam. I frequently provide authoritative voter registration information and statistics from my system into discussions.

        I also criticize the bureaucracy and party controlled system.

        This is bragging rights, and a way to reach the candidates, bypassing the party gatekeepers.

  2. Pa citizen says:

    It is time to impeach 4 State Supreme Court Judges who would rather be legislators. The State Supreme court does not have the authority to write the congressional map.

    1. Conservative Dem says:

      Fairness is unfair when it comes to the GOP!

  3. Westmoreland says:

    I’m guessing the new 14th was setup to be the sacrificial district following the 2020 census. Westmoreland is losing population, while Washington and Bulter have increased. Fayette and Greene will continue to lose population as well. The Dems can win the 14th with a candidate that appeals to the people of Greene and Fayette counties.

    1. Blue Dog Dem says:

      No they set up the 10th district to be absorbed in 2020; it can be easily sliced up by the surrounding districts. Its a great idea because it rids us of either Perry or Smucker

  4. ONGRESSMAN says:

    It looks like it is time to draft former Congressman former Tim Holden in the new 9th District.

    1. Blue Dog Dem says:

      Couldn’t have said it better myself. The Dems better wise up and realize they can’t run a far-left candidate in every district and hope to win anything other than 2nd place.

  5. from the burg says:

    Republicans have been fully out of control in their power grab that’s lasted years.
    The nerve of two Republican legislators secretly crafting a crappy map without input from Democrats, shareholders or experts.
    That ploy will hurt their cause going forward. It shows intent to continue to cheat voters.

    The court said that its newly drawn map is “superior or comparable” to all the submitted proposals based on “traditional redistricting criteria of compactness, contiguity, equality of population, and respect for the integrity of political subdivisions.”

  6. Reasonable Rep says:

    David –

    The provision of the state constitution that you cite governs the Legislative Reapportionment Commission. For a minute I had this fact confused myself, but the LRC only deals with *state* legislature maps, not congressional maps.

    I grant that the map produced by the PA Supreme Court is a dramatic improvement over the 2012 map. However, I echo the sentiments of Chief Justice Saylor:

    “I incorporate my comments from my previous expressions in this case in support of my continuing disapproval of the extraordinary course of these proceedings . . . . The latest round includes: the submission, within the past few days, of more than a dozen sophisticated redistricting plans; the lack of an opportunity for critical evaluation by all of the parties; the adoption of a judicially created redistricting plan apparently upon advice from a political scientist who has not submitted a report as of record nor appeared as a witness in any court proceeding in this case; and the absence of an adversarial hearing to resolve factual controversies arising in the present remedial phase of this litigation. In these circumstances, the displacement to the judiciary of the political responsibility for redistricting — which is assigned to the General Assembly by the United States Constitution — appears to me to be unprecedented.”

    Article IV, § 4 of the federal constitution requires that every state have a republican form of government — legislature, executive, and judiciary. In the same charter, Article I, § 4 provides that congressional maps in each state be determined “by the Legislature thereof.”

    If the Pennsylvania Judiciary hears a state constitutional challenge to the congressional map, gives the Legislature a few weeks to secure the Executive’s consent to a new map, then purports to unilaterally issue a new map if the Legislature does not meet the ultimatum . . . . then Article I, § 4 has effectively been erased from the United States Constitution.

    1. David Diano says:

      Reasonable Rep-

      Considering it’s the only discussion of reapportionment in the State Constitution, the same principles should apply.

      The PA Legislature is also subject to the state constitution. The deliberate disenfranchisement of voters cannot be ignored, just as the court stepped in and stopped the Legislature with their blatant VoteID law.

      But, Saylor is 100% incorrect about the time frame and the difficulty evaluating the plans submitted. The GOP plan was immediately recognized by both amateurs and experts as an obvious gerrymander. The same for Wolf’s plan and the Dems.

      The court could have moved the election date back a month, as I said, that would just have created another month of delays and roadblocks from the GOP.

      Why is everyone (on the GOP side) afraid of a fair map, when the voters are demanding fair maps?

      1. Tom Walker says:

        Because no one’s definition of fair is the same…. Also you make a pretty steep jump with your assessment that because the PA Constitution stipulates this for state districts it should mean the same for congressional. That is not at all how constitutional law and federalism in general works. You are really going to be butt hurt when the SCOTUS picks this case up.

      2. pennpatriot49 says:

        Give it about a week or so and we’ll see how the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the PA Map! If the U.S. Supreme Court allows the PROCESS of this map, then the U.S. Supreme Court will have effectively repealed Article 1, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution!

  7. David Diano says:

    PA State Constitution Section 17
    (h) If a preliminary, revised or final reapportionment plan
    is not filed by the commission within the time prescribed by
    this section, unless the time be extended by the Supreme Court
    for cause shown, the Supreme Court shall immediately proceed on
    its own motion to reapportion the Commonwealth.

    This establishes that the Supreme Court can do the reapportionment, if there is a failure by the normal commission or legislative process. Given that the Supreme Court ruled the old map unconstitutional, and the GOP failed even to attempt a constitutional map (and tried to run out the clock), the Court has the authority to make their own map.

    There is ZERO evidence or indication that the new map was a partisan gerrymander, and all evidence points to a fair effort.

    The claims by the GOP that they “didn’t have enough time” are complete bullsh*t, because they had time to create a new GOP gerrymander, which is harder than making a fair map.

    1. Sparky says:

      Your an idiot.

    2. Bob butler says:

      I am getting tired of people cherry picking this one chapter. The rest of this section talks about the convening of a reappointment commission after a census (which didnt happn) also thid is regarding STATE representative and senate districts as it notes 203 house districts and 50 Senate.

      1. David Diano says:

        Bob butler-

        It’s not a cherry pick. It’s the counter argument to the false claim that the court has no authority whatsoever to make maps for reapportionment.

        The court, having determined that the original map was unconstitutional, has broad authority to make a correction to protect the voting rights of Pennsylvanians.

        Had this case been settled last year, there would have been time for commissions, etc. But, the truth is that the GOP was NEVER going to produce a fair map.

        This map is fair, and long overdue. I would have been fine with pushing back the election a month to June, but since the GOP would have continued their f*ckery (and Wolf was no better with his maps), this map is the best outcome for the voters.

        1. Tom Walker says:

          You are specifically missing the part about after a census. Read the whole section, it has absolutely no bearing on this conversation. So yes, you ARE cherry picking one chapter out of many that, out of context, looks like a viable argument when it is not.

          1. David Diano says:

            Tom-

            The census data was used to make the new maps (and the 2011 map, and Wolf’s and the Dem’s maps)

            The difference is that the NEW maps are using the census data and NOT the voter registration data nor election turnout performance (other than as a check that they didn’t create a statistical anomaly).

    3. Peter says:

      You do realize that Article 2, Section 17 (Ammended in 1968)speak to the Legislative Reapportionment Commision. This applies to state legislative districts ONLY! The PA constitution is silent as to Congressional redisticting, making the the US Constitution, Article 1, section 4 the law. Of course that never seems to stop politically motivated judges from deciding this stuff on their own. We’ll see what SCOTUS, particularly Justice Kennedy, says on the matter.

  8. Ken Davis says:

    These maps are fair. The GOP decided the legislative process wasn’t right for this and are now complaining. Not sure what they have to complain about except they will lose seats. 3 will go Dem and 2 others will be competitive.

  9. Ken Davis says:

    The way I see it is that 3 CD’s will definitely go blue. Another 2 will be competitive. It is a fair map overall. Much more fair than the joke written by 2 Republicans. I have to laugh seeing R’s complain that this did not go through the “legislative” process. When they had their chance, they decided to skip that entirely. The courts maps will stand and the GOP can stamp their feet and throw themselves on the floor until kingdom come.

  10. 18voter says:

    After watching the debate last night,thank goodness we won’t have saccone or lamb as our congressmen,at least doyle will have the balls to stand and ban assault weapons.

  11. Josh says:

    Doesn’t matter how reasonable this map looks, and yes, it does look tighter than the obviously gerrymandered ones every other political actor had submitted. No court has the Constitutional function of drawing maps. At most a court can declare a map unconstitutional and remand the map-making process back to the legislative process, where all maps are supposed to originate. This is a judicial usurpation of legislative duties. I am pretty sure the US Supreme Court will override this.

    1. Ken Davis says:

      The GOP had their chance and thought it was OK for 2 of their members to draw a map. Nope.

    2. Ken Davis says:

      New York and Florida already set precedent on this and it survived court challenges. So, the GOP is basically left with no recourse. Maybe I am wrong and the U.S. Supreme Court says no. I highly doubt that though given that they already said the state sup’s court order stands and the precedents set with the other 2 states.

      1. Josh says:

        If the US Supreme Court follows the plain language of the US Constitution, then they will set everything back to the old map because of the voters’ interest in having a real primary season. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the state legislatures get just one bite at this. It’s a process. Naturally I agree with you that the latest Republican map was a total joke, aimed at equally undermining both Democrats and conservatives. The three Democrat maps were marginally better, but also obviously gerrymandered.

      2. Plubius says:

        The U.S. Supreme Court did not take the case, because it wasn’t ripe. At that time the state Supreme Court had ordered the state legislature and governor to agree on new maps, the constitutional process for drawing districts. Now the state court has drawn maps on it’s own and usurped that constitutional prerogative of the political branches. The High Court may well now take this case and decide that the state court, while within its’ bounds to declare the old districts unconstitutional, had no power to draw new districts. The remedy may be to throw out the state court’s maps and order them to go through the authorized process. In short, just as it was probably always the governors intention to have these districts drawn by the Democratic controlled state Supreme Court, it may have been Justice Alito’s intention all along to allow the state court to overreach so that he could get this into the hands of a final partisan actor in this Kabuki dance, the GOP controlled U.S. Supreme Court that gave us Gore v. Bush. All to cute by half.

  12. gulag Pittsburgh says:

    Huge improvement over the GOP gerrymandered map.

  13. PA-5 now? says:

    So, who is running in PA-5? Do the PA-1 and PA-7 candidates all get combined? Who do people thing is still viable in the new lines.

    Having seen the old PA-7 candidates speak, I can’t imagine Shelly Chauncey and Elizabeth Moro can run in the new PA-5 as they come off very conservative and lots of dog whistles. Will we get Delco taken over by the Philly machine because of the South Philly portion?

    I’m hoping I can count our primary candidates on my fingers…

    1. Ken Davis says:

      Parts of South Philly have a decent amount of GOP representation. Southwest is another story. The old 7 from a few decades ago included a large portion of that. It was how Edgar beat Weldon. The new CD is not that awful for the GOP but the previous map was beyond a joke.

    2. Delco Moderate says:

      Agreed with Ken. Also, Weldon came back in 1986 and did win the district, when Edgar ran for Senate.

      With Delaware County having changed over 30 years, GOP can still be competitive if they run a well-known moderate.

      Actually, were it not for the other problems, I think Pat Meehan would still be competitive.

  14. Mike says:

    Put very simply, this actually isn’t the total wipeout many Republicans feared and Democrats hoped for. By my read, Dems are on target for 2-3 pick-ups, which is pretty much in line with what a fair-minded redraw should bring. The 13-5 Republican gerrymander was insane for a purple state like ours. The east becomes much friendler territory for the Dems, while they pretty much remain locked out of the rest of the state, although a district in the northern Pittsburgh suburbs becomes much more competitive under the new lines.

    By my estimation, Republicans get 7 safe seats under this map, while Dems get 5. 6 of the new seats are competitive. CD01 in Bucks County (along with the new CD07 in the Lehigh Valley) remains an extremely marginal seat. Fitzpatrick gets a slight edge for the moment, but the seat goes from a slight Trump district to a slight Clinton one. It could definitely go either way.

    Ryan Costello is much more endangered now, but the district is centered in Chester County, which is still the “reddest” of the Philly collar counties. Costello’s moderate profile will definitely help him, and I’ll give him a slight edge for the moment. This could definitely change if a “blue wave” builds later in the year.

    The open Lehigh Valley seat is now an extremely marginal seat, which I think probably goes Dem this year. Republicans could definitely make it a race with the right candidate, but given the environment and it being an open seat, I like the Dems to take this one.

    Matt Cartwright will have a race in the new CD08, and we’ll see if Republican movement in the northeast is a permanent thing or was merely a Trump phenomenon in 2016. Cartwright is helped by the district being centered in Wilkes-Barre/Scranton, but he shouldn’t take anything for granted in a Trump +10 district. I like Cartwright to keep it this cycle, but he’d probably be in deeper trouble in a Republican year similar to 2016.

    Scott Perry’s district becomes considerably more competitive, and he could prove too conservative to hold it. However, I’m not sure what Dem will actually throw their hat in the ring against him, so he remains the favorite here for the moment.

    Keith Rothfus’s district goes from solid Trump to a much more competitive Trump +3. However, I like Rothfus to keep it, as the district takes in a lot of lean-to-solid Republican territory in the north Pittsburgh suburbs, as well as now GOP-leaning Beaver County. The right Democrat could definitely give Rothfus a race, but I’m not sure who (if anyone) steps forward for the Dems here. Rothfus remains the favorite until further notice. (Note : this is my CD).

    A quick note on CD18. The court screwed the GOP here big-time, as they drew in the Republican-leaning south Pittsburgh sururbs in with the city of Pittsburgh. Not sure if this strengthens the GOP argument in court or not, but it does seem like the PA Supremes did try to stick it to the Republicans in this district.

    All of this assumes this is actually the map we’ll be using this year, as the GOP is sure to try to bottle this up in court. However, if this is our new map, it isn’t exactly the slam-dunk Dems thought they would get.

    If I’m right, Dems pick up 3 seats, bringing the final tally to 10R/8D. Fitpatrick and Costello could easily fall as well, although something tells me they hang on in the end.

    The best part of all of this? We get to do it again in two years!

    Joy.

    1. revresbo says:

      My impression is pretty much the same. The big surprise is how many truly competitive districts they have created. If the point was to make representatives actually accountable to the voters, then these competitive districts are Exhibit A.

    2. Robert B Sklaroff, M.D. says:

      You may wish to recalculate after a TRUE Conservative [Dean H. Malik, Esquire] is nominated in the “new” Bucks County district; he’ll be “#1 in PA-#1” and mobilize TRUE conservatives to counter whatever fanciful blue-wave the Dems may attempt to conjure…as opposed to Brother Brian [a.k.a. “The Swamp Fox”].

      1. Tired says:

        If Dean Malik gets the not in the new 1st District he loses by 11 points.

      2. David Diano says:

        “TRUE Conservative”
        Translation:

        Complete @sshole that doesn’t understand the function of government, injects religion into politics, and doesn’t care about anyone who isn’t a rich white man.

    3. Robin says:

      This is one of the best analyses I have seen.

    4. Ken Davis says:

      We will have to disagree on Ryan Costello in 6. The “moderate” label does not fit him in reality and people here now know that. He has an A+ rating with the NRA and votes with Trump almost all the time. Further the CD went from Clinton +1 to Clinton +9. It is also an extremely educated CD, which also favors the Democrat. I see this as an easy flip to the Dems.

      1. Austin Michael says:

        Alright troll get off the imaginary blue wave.

    5. Ken Davis says:

      Also, in the 17 elections, 4 row offices were up and all 4 were won by Dem women. The first Democrats to EVER hold row offices in CHESCO. EVER. I ask that you take a deeper look at this county. You will be surprised at how blue it is turning.

  15. Germanicus says:

    Put a Blue Dog back in Congress. Tim Holden for the 9th.

  16. Same Old Same Old says:

    King Scarnati and Wannabe Gov Turzai have gotten us into this massive mess of congressional districts so goofed up that the highest court of Pa. had to intervene to breath fairness into what has become the laughing stock of the entire nation! Think of it, our beautiful Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is the butt of jokes with the congressional district that has been drawn to look like Goofy kicking Donald Duck in the backside. Fundamental fairness is essential to democracy and thank God the Supreme Court of Pa decided to right a total abuse of power and redraw congressional districts. We must form an independent commission for future redraws and this must never happen again. Kudos to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for righting this horrible wrong and redrawing Congressional Districts!

  17. Dawn says:

    If you’re like me, and don’t like the fact that a Dem-controlled supreme court drew these lines themselves, for the SAME reason you don’t like the fact that the previous map was drawn by Republicans in power, to maintain that power…. then pick up a phone. Call your state reps and senators. Demand they CALL A VOTE on SB22 and HB722 (107 co-sponsors already!)— for an independent committee of voters, without skin the game, to draw the districts going forwards. No parties involved. No conflict of interest. No safely drawn districts, to silence voters. No more.

    1. Conservative Dem says:

      Watch what you wish for. An independent commissioner might make it more democrat friendly.

  18. College Dem says:

    Will Dave Reed be dropping out since he is no longer in an open seat? Does he have the arrogance to run in a district he doesn’t live in (new 13th) or the stones to primary Glenn Thompson in the 15th?

    1. John says:

      He has no STONES

  19. Oscar Bell says:

    This map is no doubt gerrymandered. Look at Luzerne County. Why was it split the way it was? Easy answer, to protect Cartwright. They should’ve given this to an independent citizen’s commission. And before anyone jumps down my throat, I’m a Democrat.

  20. Dave says:

    Eastern montco shoukd have gone with northeast Philly. The lines inside the City were clearly done with no understanding of geography. Lines should be drawn to link neighborhoods of similair ilk. (Ex. Harrisburg plus its suburbs). As a Dem, the lines were clearly messed up, but now a Stanford professor gets to draw lines without input from Pennsylvania’s citizens. I think all can agree something is wrong with that. On the other hand, other states had boundaries thrown out, and the legislature still gets it wrong. (See NC)

  21. Jake says:

    All the court really did was to re-gerrymander the map to help Democrats. They did not eliminate gerrymandering. Worse, the court drew the map and there is a clear separation of powers issue that now must be decided in the Federal Courts. We are getting to the point in this country where the courts must solve every dispute which is not what was envisioned by the Founding Fathers. It’s a very sad state of affairs.

    1. Isaac L. says:

      This is a ridiculous take. Republicans gerrymandered the map to the point where we were a national laughingstock with some of the most gerrymandered districts in the country, so of course any fair map is going to benefit Democrats. The court’s map is twice as compact and has half the splits of the Republican map with many more competitive districts that don’t benefit either party. To call this a partisan gerrymander is to change the definition of the word entirely.

      You also invoke the Founders and yet completely ignore their wisdom in establishing independent courts and judicial review, as well as the fact that our own constitution demands that districts be compact and respect the boundaries of counties and municipalities unless absolutely necessary. If you care about the constitution, then the Republican maps should be an outrage. This map is clearly much closer to what our constitutional authors had in mind.

    2. Ken Davis says:

      I get it. You are for states rights until you don’t like the decisions of the states. Then, you are all for going to the feds.

  22. Lehigh Valley says:

    The printers of campaign lit are the true beneficiaries of this new map. New lit for EVERYONE!

  23. Zakrey Bissell says:

    I think for the new Representatives for the 116th congress will be.

    District 1: Brian Fitzpatrick
    District 2: Brendon Boyle
    District 3: Dwight Evans
    District 4: Mike Stack current Lieutenant Governor
    District 5: Dan Muroff
    District 6: Ryan Costello
    District 7: Dean Browning
    District 8: Matt Cartwright
    District 9: Dan Meuser
    District 10: Scott Perry
    District 11: Lloyd Smucker
    District 12: Tom Marino
    District 13: John Eischelberger
    District 14: Rick Saccone or Conor Lamb
    District 15: Glenn Thompson
    District 16: Mike Kelly
    District 17: Keith Rothfus
    District 18: Mike Doyle

    I think for Lieutenant Governor Mike Stack should and will run for congress in 2018 because I think for he will do well there and win this race in 2018 instead of reelection because for he will lose the primary to a Democratic opponent in that race and there might be a republican successor for that race, Please get Mike Stack is to run for congress and win in Pennsylvania’s 4th Congressional District in 2018.

    1. Joe says:

      How many are GOP and how many are Dem on your list?

    2. William S Fitzpatrick says:

      Stack would not win a dem primary in montco

      Boyle could because of name in significant part of the county and respect as an incumbent.

    3. Robert B Sklaroff, M.D. says:

      #1 in District #1 will be Dean H. Malik, Esquire.

    4. Patti says:

      You are so far off the demographics of the new districts. It seems you picked names that may have had a chance with the old leanings, but some of these went from swings to super blue and vis versa. If Dan Muroff couldn’t get more than 4/4 in the 2nd in 2016, he’s not doing any better in a liberal district this time. The 6th was likely going to Houlahan before and now Costello is toast!

      My predictions, given new demographics:

      District 1: Scott Wallace
      District 2: Brendon Boyle
      District 3: Dwight Evans
      District 4: Shira Goodman
      District 5: Molly Sheehan
      District 6: Chrissy Houlahan
      District 7: Susan Wild or Gregory Edwards
      District 8: Matt Cartwright
      District 9: Dan Meuser
      District 10: Toss Up – Prob New H-burg candidates enter
      District 11: Lloyd Smucker
      District 12: Tom Marino
      District 13: John Eischelberger
      District 14: Rick Saccone
      District 15: Glenn Thompson
      District 16: Mike Kelly
      District 17: Conor Lamb
      District 18: Mike Doyle

      New split is 10-8 or 11-7 depending on #Pa10. We also get 3-4 women.

      1. EvilBobCaseyIV says:

        LOL wow you don’t sound like a liberal troll or anything with these picks. I’m kidding, because you do. Chrissy Houlahan was never/will never be up in the 6th after it was exposed that she profited millions off of sweatshops and paid the workers 35 cents an hour. Now we hear that she won’t comment on her company’s history of putting out shirts calling women fat and ugly.

        1. Patti says:

          I didn’t make any statements about who should win, only who will win. Like it or not, Costello is a douche and will lose to Chrissy. I have my own reservations about her, but she’s way stronger than Costello.

          1. Austin Michael says:

            Patti are you that detached from society ????

      2. Tom Walker says:

        I dont think D10 is a toss up. Scott Perry is in that district, and while more competitive than his last, he should easily win it

      3. Conservative Dem says:

        Wont Rick saccone be in Mike doyles district?

    5. Robin says:

      I don’t see Mike Stack running for Congress; he is still heavily invested in the LG race. Also, the new district 4 is a Montgomery County District and I can’t see him running or winning in this district. They are going to go for someone in Montgomery County. Shira Goodman has already announced and she is well known and, in this year of the woman, a serious contender.

    6. Ken Davis says:

      Costello will lose. It is now a +9 Clinton CD and 4 row offices in Chester County were won by the Dems (all women) in 17 for the first time ever. The victories were from 5 to 9 points. An extremely educated CD and where it isn’t the demographics don’t favor the R’s. It is not a rural white area anymore. Some have missed how CHESCO has turned because of how the maps were set up previously. Costello could run up the score in counties where his A+ rating with the NRA was a positive. That is not that case in CHESCO. I wouldn’t say it is a liberal bastion by any stretch but it is trending blue now.

    7. John says:

      Meuser is in District 8 now. He can’t run in 9.

      1. Ken Davis says:

        He can run in 9 but would have to move into the CD if he wins.

  24. Reasonable Rep says:

    Also, it was mentioned below that Connor Lamb and Mike Doyle are in the same district. I believe that Lamb’s opponent, Rick Saccone, is also from Allegheny County and would therefore be within that district as well.

    1. Patti says:

      It’s my understanding that Allegheny is split, where Saccone is in the new 14th and Lamb ends in the new 17.

  25. Reasonable Rep says:

    Whether you like this map or not, I maintain that this is a very arrogant move by the PA Supreme Court that will be stayed in the short term and ultimately overruled by the SCOTUS.

    Try to view this from a separation of powers standpoint, rather than the lens of political parties. The federal constitution vests map drawing power specifically with the state legislatures, as opposed to the state executives or state judiciaries. Granted, in the Arizona Redistricting case, SCOTUS found that voters of a state can impose certain limitations on the legislature. In Pennsylvania’s case, our state Supreme Court read certain limitations to exist in the state constitution and found that the current map violated those limitations. Fair enough.

    But what is the remedy? To suggest that the judiciary simply assumes the power to correct it is a leap in logic that goes far beyond anything suggested by SCOTUS in the Arizona Redistricting case or any other case.

    Does the legislature get to re-draw the map? Is this the sort of legislation that the governor has to sign off before it can be re-evaluated by the court? What is the timing allotted for this? If a map submitted by the legislature addresses the Court’s concerns and is constitutional, is it the Court’s role to investigate whether alternatives are “more” constitutional? And if constitutionally is an absolute measure, can any law, including a map, be “more” or “less” constitutional in the first instance?

    What unfolded here was a situation in which, purposefully or not, the executive branch and judiciary branch functioned together to usurp from the legislature the map drawing power that the United States Constitution specifically grants to it. The Legislature could have submitted a “really, really” constitutional map and, as long as the Governor didn’t sign off on it within the short time frame allotted, the Court purported to assume the map drawing power and impose one that it saw as “more” constitutional.

    We shall see…

    1. kevin says:

      the pissed and moaned and then never passed an alternative other than the 2 Republican leaders submitting one. the court took action to get districts in time to remedy before 2018 election.

    2. Ken Davis says:

      They had their chance and decided against a legislative solution. Here is whey the Supreme Court will not intervene:

      1. They already issued a ruling that mandated that the PA Supreme Court had standing.
      2. Previous precedents have already been established with Florida and New York.

      It seems as though the GOP now wants to ignore states rights and have the Feds decides. It won’t work because 3 of the Conservative justices will view this as a matter for the states. I doubt they will even take the case and I cannot see a lower fed court overruling given this set of facts.

      All of your questions are irrelevant. The R’s decided to have 2 members draw up a map. They made the decision on process.

  26. Huey Jwone says:

    Amanda Holt is opposed!!!! More splits than any resubmitted version except one. Amanda Holt said it’s bad! So it is bad, and you should listen to her.

    1. revresbo says:

      Source? Link, or GTFO…

    2. John H says:

      Who the heck is Amanda Holt and why should anyone care what she thinks?

  27. Hannibal says:

    Looks like Conor Lamb and Mike Doyle might be in same district now, won’t that be fun if true.

    1. Frank Burns says:

      I believe Lamb would be the17th with Rothfus.

  28. David Diano says:

    If townships (or Philly wards) aren’t split, there should be a fairly simple text description of the map. For the 54 un-split counties is just a list of them and the new district numbers.

    If anyone can produce (and post) such a list that would be great.

  29. Joe says:

    I’ve been analyzing the map further. Once again, you can’t trust Democrats. They spit on the idea of a Republican form of Government, and only like Democracy when they win.

    It’s GERRYMANDERED to favor Democrats. Just more election rigging/fixing to get Nancy Pelosi back in as Speaker of The House…..AGAIN!

    1. David Diano says:

      Joe-

      It’s not gerrymandered to favor the Dems, because it’s not gerrymandered at all. The previous map was gerrymandered to favor the GOP 13-5 (when the split should have been close to 9-9 or 10-8)

      But, the GOP will always complain when the Dems get a fair map.

      1. Joe says:

        Like I said before,it looks, on the surface, like an even split 10-8 GOP-Dem majority with 3 actual tossups. This District Map can go to a high of a 12-6 GOP/Dem Delegation to another high of an 11-7 Dem/GOP Delegation.

        Another fun fact, is that the PA Supreme Court ignored the fact that GOP Congressional Representatives OUTPERFORMED Donald Trump in total votes against their Democrat Oppoents, not because of gerrymandering, but because Democrat Voters on their own accord, cluster into the big cities.

        There are towns and counties that are split in uneven manners, contrary to the Court’s own ruling.

        The Whole of Philadelphia County needs to be busted up into it’s own 2 sperate districts because of it’s population-geography. Philadelphia’s politics also deviate so much farther left than the remainder of PA (The Eastern Half of Pittsburgh does too), and the rest of PA is being punished for it by the court.

        Once again, just more election rigging/fixing to get Nancy Pelosi back in as Speaker of The House.

        1. Montco PA Dem says:

          Snowflake.

    2. Isaac L. says:

      This is hilarious. Read what you’re writing. No one – not even Republicans – dispute that the 2011 maps were gerrymandered. They said “to the winner go the spoils” and threw out a few tu quoque arguments to boot to justify it. Literally any map that is less gerrymandered is going to favor Democrats. This is basic logic.

      Even if we are going by the spoils system – as Republicans seem to be advocating – Democrats won the Supreme Court in free and fair elections that aren’t subject to gerrymandering. By Republicans’ own logic, Democrats should be allowed to conduct a partisan gerrymander since they won – what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Fortunately for Republicans in Pennsylvania, the Democrats in power are more interested in good governance than rigging the playing field.

  30. Joe Bloomsburg says:

    Looks great! Too bad this didn’t happen earlier. I understand the point about the numbering …. but look on the bright side — maybe we can see it as sort of a fresh start! I’m personally happy to see the 10th and 11th scam districts and numbers totally erased …. we should put the filthy legacy Barletta and Marino tied around on our state and our party when they’re out of Congress for good next year!

    1. Joe says:

      Bob Brady and Philadelphia Democrats are the BIGGEST stain on PA. You’d be more intelligent in bashing them.

  31. Hacks all says:

    The Supreme Court WILL toss this out on the grounds the court has no legal right to make the maps. That wasn’t at issue the first time through. Look for late primary election this year.

  32. Carole Rubley says:

    Looks good from Chester County with District 6 united.

  33. SEPA says:

    SEPA is very interesting. Costello is probably done, Fitz was already fighting for his life and it just got harder…Curious to see if Boyle chooses to run in PA-4 over PA-2 now. Would be interested to see if Montco Dems would allow that to happen now that Montco finally get’s its own Congressional District. If not Boyle, who? Val Arkoosh, Madeleine Dean, Matt Bradford? Leach would have been obvious but he cannot run with his baggage.

    1. PhillyPolitico says:

      Boyle lives in Northeast Philly. No way he moves to Montco unless he thinks he *absolutely* cannot win the primary. Because there’s no guarantee he would–and probably good reason to think he would not–win the primary in Montco. If for no other reason, he’d lose a big staple of his base which is the Philly unions. Especially the FOP.

      1. SEPA says:

        I don’t disagree. But if he gets a primary opponent in PA-2, that might convince him to go to PA-4 if he could convince MCDC to support him.

        In the end, I expect him to be the nominee in PA-2 and Val Arkoosh to be the nominee in PA-4, but this sure is interesting.

        1. PD says:

          Val has indicated she has no interest. Rumors have it Montco is looking for a candidate for PA04

    2. EvilBobCaseyIV says:

      How is Costello done by any stretch? He used to represent Chester County as a whole when he was Commissioner less than a decade ago. He already had the bluest parts of Chestco in his district. He adds Southern Chestco farmland?

      1. jjcnpa says:

        The heavily city of Reading was added

        1. jjcnpa says:

          I meant heavily Democratic

      2. Ken Davis says:

        Evil, a couple of things:

        The CD has turned bluer. It went to Clinton by a sizable margin in 17. In 17, 4 county row offices were up for election and all 4 were won by Dem women. The first time in history that a Dem has held any row office in Chester County. Many schools boards and are now Dem controlled as well. Other local offices are now held by D’s for the first time ever.

        The north and east part of Chesco is extremely educated. That favors the Dems and that was clearly seen on Election Day. As for the rural area, it is now much smaller than before (Lancaster County is still rural) and the demographics strongly favor the D’s. The CD with the old map was Clinton +1. With the new map it is Clinton +9. His A+ rating with the NRA really hurts him now with the current makeup of CHESCO. Many have missed this transformation.

        1. Ken Davis says:

          Went to Clinton in 16, obviously.

  34. Stanley White says:

    It’s a shame that Philadelphia’s 1st District, which literally is the nation’s birthplace will now essentially be the 3rd for no reason. Call me sentimental, I would have liked to call the Buck’s District the 3rd and kept the 1st in Philly.

  35. Joe says:

    Looks like an even split 10-8 GOP-Dem majority with 3 actual tossups. This District Map can go to a 12-6 GOP/Dem Delegation to another high of an 11-7 Dem/GOP Delegation.

    I’d like to States like NJ, IL, OR, WA, and MD have their GERRYMANDERED maps struck down as well.

    1. Hacks all says:

      “achieve (a result) by manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency.”By definition, the court is also guilty of gerrymandering, even if it is to create an equal number of close races in the state.

      1. Joe says:

        I know. I’ve analyzed the Map further and it’s definitely GERRYMANDERED to favor Democrats.

    2. Kevin says:

      NJ isn’t really gerrymandered in a partisan sense. Traditionally, NJ goes for incumbent protection.

      Oh, and NJ actually has a redistricting commission.

  36. Baxter G says:

    Don’t know if this favors Ds
    Don’t know if this favors Rs
    But when I look at it… IT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE…

    1. truth hurts says:

      it splits York county in half using a lake for the line now that makes sense

    2. PAVoter123 says:

      The lines are drawn to screw current members of gop delegation ie. Perry who lives in that section and had ALL of York county before. It divideds by a “lake” isn’t this the same BS that dems were whinning about before the split? Better to split else via a ‘random’ lake.

      1. Joe says:

        I’ve been analyzing the map further.

        It’s GERRYMANDERED to favor Democrats. Just more election rigging/fixing to get Nancy Pelosi back in as Speaker of The House…..AGAIN!

        1. Deitsch Einwohner says:

          Joe, You certainly copy and paste a lot.

        2. Ken Davis says:

          One that makes sense. Sorry.

  37. Miss Lynne says:

    MUCH better!! Thanks to all for their hard work and commitment to this very important problem. District 18. 15243

  38. Lila James says:

    looks like a good map. I bet there is a happy state rep from Westmoreland County who was headed towards the sidelines. Maybe Trump will reschedule his trip now?

  39. from the burg says:

    Even the hillbillies and ridge runners of southwestern Pa. are sick of republicans and unhappy with criminal justice set backs with Jeff Sessions, and the Trump-Russia money laundering connection is considered treasonous.
    Trump Regret is Real.
    Being a democrat is considered cool, intelligent and modern.

  40. WesternSizzlin says:

    Looks like do nothing Doyle stays safe. DEM Socialists please Primary him.

  41. Steventodd says:

    By far the most fair and common sensical of all the partisan maps I’ve seen. Was that really so hard?

    1. David Diano says:

      A fair map is easier to generate than a partisan map.

  42. Ryan says:

    District numbers make sense finally

    1. David Diano says:

      Agree. Though all the candidates have to change the numbers on their business cards and literature.

      1. truth hurts says:

        please be sure to send that invoice and any refunds for the campaigns for people that can not run
        to the Pennsylvania supreme court care of the dems

        or maybe the league of women voters or maybe David will pony -up

        1. David Diano says:

          truth hurts-

          Well, a bunch jumped in recently on hopes of a redistricting, and the smart ones left the district number out.

          Actually, NOTHING is stopping anyone from running. Someone in Philly can run for congress is Erie. You just have to move there if you are elected.

          Actually, the GOP should pay for having created the original unconstitutional map in the first place.

          1. Carole Rubley says:

            Looks good from Chester County’s perspective with the 6 District united.

          2. Hacks all says:

            Then their petitions are illegal because they were not properly filled out. It’s a shame you didn’t identify them so we could use this as evidence in challenging their petition. You guys never abide by the rules.

Comments are closed.