My Attempt to Make Fair Districts

[muon2]

Great idea.

Basically, I'm trying to make fair districts - not paying attention to partisan composition, keeping metro areas together, following real boundaries, etc. I'll explain why I think these districts are fair, and compare them to the current maps.


IDAHO

The plan: One district for the Boise-Nampa area. Another for the remainder. This is a logical metro area to keep together, and it'll connect most of the rural areas. it also gives a divide that looks somewhat like the state border.

The map:

District 1 is the home of Boise, Nampa, and Twin Falls. The only county plit is in southern Valley County. The district is more or less rectangular. Rating: Safe R

District 2 contains Coeur d'Alene and Pocatello, as well as most of the National Parks and the more mountainous parts. Rating: Safe R

Improvements: I combined Boise and Nampa, which is one metro area. In addition, I followed county boundaries to a greater extent, opted for a northwest-southeast divide rather than the awkward-looking east-west one that exists now. The disparity between population densities in the current district 1 is lowered considerably as well.

Here's my thoughts on your plan for ID. It would be nice to keep the Boise UCC (Urban County Cluster) together, but your result has two big problems. Culturally the northern panhandle shares little in common with the Mormon eastern ID. The landscapes are pretty different, too. But not only are they culturally different, but you can't get from the northern to the eastern part as you have drawn it.

Here is my version posted in 2012, that at least provides for road connections between the northern and eastern portions while keeping the UCC intact. Note that no counties are chopped and the population deviation is less than 0.5% from the quota, which is a reasonable limit given SCOTUS rulings.



I'm happy to give you more analysis of your other states if you like. Much of what I say will reference the UCC definitions and muon rules which are stickied on the board.

[muon2]

"Culturally the northern panhandle shares little in common with the Mormon eastern ID. The landscapes are pretty different, too."

Hey, Muon2, just why did you open this Pandora's Box?  The Muon2 rules don't take cognizance of such perceived cultural divides.  One man's cultural divide, is another man's band of brothers (with the differing opinions seemingly are almost always tied coincidentally enough to what happens to be the partisan preferences of the two chaps) Shame on you! Sin no more!

Just stick to you little roadie thing, and don't gild the lily this way is my best advice. Less is more.

All true, and I stick to the rules with my example. I only brought up the other issue since ID has a fairly neutral process, and I wanted to put their reasons on the record. It's a case of not all rural being the same to the folks in ID.

[muon2]

NEBRASKA

The plan: One district for Greater Omaha, one for suburbs of Omaha and Lincoln, and one for the rest of the state.

The map:  

District 1: This district contains all of Omaha proper. It's very similar to the current district, though it includes fewer suburbs. Rating: Likely R
District 2: This district contains Lincoln, southern Omaha suburbs, and Southeast Nebraska. The border between districts 2 and 3 west of Omaha is the Platte River, which happens to also be a major county boundary.Rating: Safe R
District 3: This district is mainly rural, although it is 9% Hispanic. Rating: Safe R[/color][/font]

Improvements: Follows logical boundaries (Omaha city, Platte River), creates slightly more geometric districts, consolidates Omaha into one district.

Could you put in your deviations from the quota on these maps. When I look at this one it looks like NE-3 is +4368 over quota (0.72%). That's not likely to stand up in court, especially since three counties are chopped in your plan. By comparison the actual plan has a deviation of +912 for NE-3 (0.15%) with only one county chop. You should keep all deviations within 0.5% unless there is a very compelling reason. Also, Omaha is only in Douglas, so why chop it?

[muon2]

I always try to get deviation under 1%. And muon, there are no county splits between district 2 and district 3 afaik?

Kevin, I know the Maine deviation was under 1,000 people.

Jackson county (Grand Island) spans both sides of the Platte so to follow the Platte as you did caused it to be chopped. I still don't know why you chopped Douglas.

Deviations as large as yours have generally not been upheld when challenged. A range of almost 1% has been upheld, however. A range of 1% is what results from a maximum deviation of 0.5%, though it is possible to exceed that deviation slightly if other districts are suitably closer to the quota.

[muon2]

The rant is appreciated, and I would hope that the per curiam opinion in Tennant v Jefferson County Commission would provide some comfort. SCOTUS took some pains there to relax some of the stricter interpretations of Karcher and Wesberry.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Variance here is what I called the range, that is the difference between the maximum and minimum district.

I also appreciate your observation about the 3% difference posed by the average difference from state to state, but I've never seen that used successfully in court. It seems that the court looks at worst case more readily (hence range not average deviation). They can do nothing about the differences between states due to constitutional requirements, so those differences seems not to be a factor.

[muon2]

Muon, what are your current predictions for reapportionment in 2020?

It's in the thread I stickied on this board.