Redistricting 2021: Republicans pass up an open shot in Northern Indiana, but make a layup in Central Indiana
The proposed new congressional map in Indiana would bolster Republicans by shoring up the left-trending 5th district, but it’s not as aggressive of a gerrymander as possible, as it leaves the democratic-leaning-but-republian-trending 1st district alone. Here’s a full breakdown of the proposal:
IN-01:
Incumbent: Frank Mrvan (D)
Current map: 56.6% Clinton -> 54.5% Biden
Proposed map: 56.3% Clinton -> 54.2% Biden
The most important district in the proposal is the first one — containing all of Lake and Porter counties, and part of LaPorte. This district sees almost no change from the current map — just a slight reshuffling of the LaPorte county portion to boost the district population by about 20k.
Republicans could have turned this into a Trump-won district, or at least a more narrowly Biden-won district, by shifting the rest of LaPorte County and part (or all) of Porter County into the 2nd district. That they’re evidently passing up that opportunity up is a nice boost for Democrats going into 2022.
Still, it’s far from impossible that this proposed 1st district could be won by Republicans at some point. Obama won it by 24% in 2012, but Biden won it by just 8%. There are several reasons for this: Democratic margins have significantly weakened in their core base of northern Lake County (Gary/Hammond/East Chicago/Whiting), owing to Trump gains with Black and Latino voters. Much of the remainder of the district is comprised of heavily white-working class areas that have shifted right (Porter and LaPorte are both Obama-Trump counties). And northern Lake County has lost population — especially Gary, which declined from 80k residents in 2010 to 69k in 2020.
IN-02:
Incumbent: Jackie Walorski (R)
Current map: 37.8% Clinton -> 39.6% Biden
Proposed map: 36.6% Clinton ->38.5% Biden
The primary Republican beneficiary of the lack of change to the 1st district is 2nd district incumbent Jackie Walorski. Just like the 1st, this district saw little change, just a few reshufflings to pick up another 20k in population. Part of Cass County was shifted over from IN-04, while part of Kosciusko County was ceded to IN-03.
This district remains completely Safe-R, whereas it would’ve had to have been *somewhat* weakened to further threaten Frank Mrvan, by picking up Michigan City and at least part of Porter County, in exchange for ceding more rural areas.
IN-03:
Incumbent: Jim Banks (R)
Current map: 31.6% Clinton -> 34.7% Biden
Proposed map: 31.9% Clinton -> 34.7% Biden
Once again, the changes here are minimal: this district picks up parts of Randolph and Blackford counties, and sheds some precincts from Kosciusko. It remains Safe R, despite democratic gains in Fort Wayne.
IN-04:
Incumbent: Jim Baird (R)
Current map: 32.0% Clinton -> 34.8% Biden
Proposed map: 31.8% Clinton -> 35.1% Biden
This western district needed to lose about 11k residents, and does so by shedding parts of Fountain, Cass and Howard counties, including Kokomo (but not Logansport). Additionally, it picks up some new precincts, including taking Martinsville from IN-09 and Zionsville from IN-05. It’s Safe-R, though it has enough high-edu precincts (i.e. in Zionsville, West Lafayette, Brownsburg) that it could plausibly trend left a bit.
IN-05:
Incumbent: Victoria Spartz (R)
Current map: 43.7% Clinton -> 48.9% Biden
Proposed map: 37.4% Clinton -> 41.8% Biden
This is the most important change to the map (as opposed to the important lack-of-a-change in IN-01). In the current district, which went from Safe Romney territory to just a 2 point Trump win, roughly 25% of votes come from northern Indianapolis, and 50% come from the north Indy suburbs (Carmel/Fishers/Zionsville/Noblesville/Westfield), with the remaining 25% coming from a mix of Indy exurbs, rural areas, and small rust-belt cities like Anderson and Marion.
In the new proposal, the Indianapolis portion is ceded to IN-07, and Zionsville shifts to IN-04. In exchange, Kokomo, Muncie and their surrounding areas are added, with high population growth in Hamilton County over the past decade making up for the fact that the areas ceded are more populous than those added.
It’s not completely impossible that this proposed district could become competitive at some point. Trump’s margin in it shrunk from 24% in 2016 to 16% in 2020. And over the course of the decade, the percentage of total votes that come from Hamilton County will increase due to stronger population growth than the rest of the district.
However, I’d still consider it a long shot for Democrats to win this district in the next decade. If Biden had won Hamilton County by 20% in November (instead of losing it by 7%), but margins stayed the same in this district’s 5 other counties, Biden still would’ve lost it by 2%. Another 27 points of suburban gains, with no further backslide in the heavily-working-class remainder of the district, is a lot to ask for. And if it does happen, that would likely indicate the GOP is completely collapsing nationally (or at least in the Midwest), so losing 1 additional seat in Indiana would simply be bolstering a Democratic supermajority, not determining control of the chamber.
IN-06:
Incumbent: Greg Pence (R)
Current map: 28.8% Clinton -> 29.7% Biden
Proposed map: 30.2% Clinton -> 33.7% Biden
This district sees the most geographic change, but from a partisanship standpoint, it goes from Safe-R to … still Safe-R. With Southeast Indiana experiencing significant population loss, the 6th district needed to pickup 30k additional residents, and it does that and much more by adding the southern 3 townships of Marion County, as well as Johnson County just to the South. In exchange, the 6th district cedes much of southeast Indiana to IN-09, and parts of its northern edge shift to IN-03 and IN-05.
IN-07:
Incumbent: Andre Carson (D)
Current map: 62.0% Clinton -> 64.1% Biden
Proposed map: 69.1% Clinton -> 71.6% Biden
Indianapolis’ main district trades its fairly-Trumpy southern 3 townships for the much more educated northern edge of town, and as such becomes an even bigger Dem vote sink. A more educated Democratic primary electorate increases the chance that this district could become a winnable target for a leftist primary challenger. The proposed district is 50% white, 33% Black and 12% Hispanic by VAP, a 2% increase in minority-VAP over the current district.
IN-08:
Incumbent: Larry Bucshon (R)
Current map: 32.3% Clinton -> 33.7% Biden
Proposed map: 32.0% Clinton -> 33.3% Biden
The 8th has the smallest population of any current district, needing to pick up 38k additional residents. In this proposal, it does so by picking up parts of Fountain, Crawford and Orange Counties, while ceding none of its current precincts. It remains Safe-R.
IN-09:
Incumbent: Trey Hollingsworth (R)
Current map: 35.9% Clinton -> 38.0 Biden
Proposed map: 35.0% Clinton -> 36.0% Biden
Unfortunately for Bloomington residents, their chances of ousting Tennessee Trey would go from 0% to -10% under this map, with the 9th district shedding D-trending Johnson County (along with Morgan County) and picking up much of Southeast Indiana, some of the most conservative territory in the state. This would put both the Louisville MSA and Cincinnati MSA portions of Indiana in the same district.
Why aren’t Republicans Gerrymandering IN-01?
There’s two basic reasons Indiana Republicans may have decided against drawing a more GOP-friendly IN-01:
- Ultra-cautious incumbent protection: to a first approximation, any decrease in Democratic margin in IN-01 would’ve meant an increase in Democratic margin in IN-02. While there was plenty of room to spare here (Trump won the proposed IN-02 by 23%), incumbents often care much more about maximizing their own job security than bolstering their party’s chance of winning a majority. This appears to be a (somewhat extreme) example of that.
- Dedication to compactness / split minimization: The proposed map is very compact and minimizes county splits, as does the current map. A gerrymander that significantly weakened IN-01 would’ve had to of sacrificed a decent bit of compactness, in addition to being highly questionable from a “communities of interest” standpoint, since Lake and Porter counties have much in common, such as bordering Lake Michigan and being part of the Chicago MSA. It would’ve been a “know it when you see it” type of gerrymander. It’s possible that Republicans are inclined to be more cautious with their gerrymanders this cycle, after a more aggressive one was thrown out by courts in Pennsylvania in 2018. Every state is different, but if Republican legislatures in other states are as cautious as the Indiana GOP is being with this map, that would be pretty good news for Democrats, potentially saving them several seats across multiple states in 2022.
