Governor's Redistricting Thread

[Verily]

We realistically need a map by the end of November since the elections are in early December and there should be time for campaigns.

[Verily]

And here's my proposal:

[Verily]

Pardon me, sir, are you a Governor? (I really don't know :?)  If not, please vacate the premises immediately, or else I shall be forced to use the Broom of Justice (tm)!

Non-Governors are allowed to make suggestions last I knew.

[Verily]

Pardon me, sir, are you a Governor? (I really don't know :?)  If not, please vacate the premises immediately, or else I shall be forced to use the Broom of Justice (tm)!

Non-Governors are allowed to make suggestions last I knew.

In PM's or separate threads - I've made a citizens thread now.

Pfft. Governors being pompous. There's no need for separate threads.

[Verily]

Jesus, your map is illegal. District 5 is too big.

[Verily]

Jesus, your map is illegal. District 5 is too big.

It#s not actually, AFAIK. However, the chance that governors will pass a non-perfectly balanced maps when balanced ones are available is very slight.

Well, then we definitely need an equal votes amendment.

[Verily]

Jesus, your map is illegal. District 5 is too big.

It#s not actually, AFAIK. However, the chance that governors will pass a non-perfectly balanced maps when balanced ones are available is very slight.

Well, then we definitely need an equal votes amendment.

The rules mandate "no more than three more than the minimum difference", the minimum difference being either 1 (as currently) or 0 depending on Census Figures.

Exactly; I've introduced an amendment to fix this, as there's no reason for it to be the case. Past groups of governors have shown themselves willing to use the other rules, such as minimal discontiguity, to achieve population equivalence, and population equivalence should be enshrined in the Constitution.

[Verily]

If the census is supposedly taken on the first Friday in November (November 2nd), and Friz moved to Oregon on November 9th, then he should still be counted in New York. In that case, my District 5 only has 11 voters. Though, as Lewis said, 12 voters is still legally acceptable.

I'm not sure whether we would count Friz as in Oregon or not, given that the Census did not take place on November 2 (and actually still hasn't taken place).

[Verily]

What hath I wrought? (Though, FWIW, in the latter map Michigan would need to be transferred to the green district to make all districts have 10 or 11 members with the Oregon-New York correction. The other gerrymandered map has no such problem.)

[Verily]

If I were to have happened to have heard a comment about the map I posted from a non-Governor, I would have been inspired to say that the map I posted appears to be completely balanced.  I would also have reprimanded the non-Governor that they should know my history of maps and realize that the map I posted in this thread is hardly gerrymandered at all for a map submitted by me, for it fiddles quite fairly with all regions (and districts are supposed to be separate from regions, after all, as I have reminded the redistricters every time for a gajillion years).

It's unbalanced because my unofficial census has an error in it; New York and Oregon should have 4 people each.

[Verily]

FTR, here are three more maps. Two of them exploit the rule that Puerto Rico is adjacent to Maine.