US House Redistricting: Michigan

[Torie]

How would that 9th vote? About d+2 or 3?

Yes, I don't think the numbers will look very good. It could be that Dem. It certainly is no better for the Pubbies than marginal. As I said, the Pubbies if they want to ax Peters (and make maybe as many as 4 other Pubbies reasonably safe, rather than on the edge), will need to change the law, or get a friendly Michigan Supreme Court. They should be nervous.

In fact, the numbers really suck for MI-09.



So the map fails. So it is either Muon2's map, with MI-11 becoming the new Dingell CD, or for some Dem, with McCotter having to move to Oakland, or the law will need to be "clarified,"  with some "helpful" amendments thereto. The problem with Muon2's map however is that extra chop into the Pointes by his wandering MI-11 CD, so it fails the efficiency test, since with one less chop per my map above, we can still have two 50% black VAP CD's. Thus, the Pubbies can't hide behind the VRA as hoped. I don't think there is an objective function here that works for the Pubbies.

Oh wait, we decided that two discontiguous chops by one CD into the same county counted for only one chop, so I guess that Pointes salient does not count as another chop. So we will have to see what we can do, if we clean up Muon2's map a bit. But not today. But it might be something like the map below.

Addendum: In fact my latest iteration of the Muon2 map (with MI-14 taking those Macomb precincts rather than MI-11) should work quite well for the Pubbies actually, with the possible exception of Walberg in MI-07, who may have a marginal seat with all that Wayne territory with which he is saddled in this map. However, his string of counties along the southern border of Michigan are quite heavily Pubbie. I don't think there is another map within existing law that works nearly as well. The advantage of this map, is that the cordon sanitaire in Washtenaw has been extended to about just the right place to keep all those massively Dem precincts in Washtenaw nicely contained on the opposite side of the Pubbie acceptable zone. Livingston County just can't handle Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti at all. The Dems have a 100,000 vote margin there.

Avoiding an illegal double split of townships or cities in Oakland while keeping MI-09 wholly contained in Oakland with just the right population with this map was quite a challenge. But I found a way!  

[Torie]

Here are the stats for the new MI-07 per the new map. The seat was marginal, and remains marginal, but with more of a Dem list. I am more convinced than ever, that if the Pubbies don't try to change the law, this is the map. Walberg's weakness in MI-07 will be the gain for Rogers in MI-08 and Camp in MI-04 in particular, both far more powerful and important Pubbie politicians.

The PVI's in a lot of Pubbie seats in Michigan in any event are going to look rather anemic per 2008 figures (the trend in MI from 2004 to 2008 must have been a couple of points to the Dems), absent doing a full throated Gerrymander. (See my Pennsylvania and Ohio and Indiana maps for what a "just go for it" Gerrymander looks like; I was a bit more restrained with Wisconsin for some reason, probably because more erosity would not change the ultimate outcome much.)

[Torie]

I added MI-04 to the list of CD's which feed through the Wastenaw MI-11 population equalizing spigot, in an attempt to get the Pubbie numbers up a bit in MI-12, MI-10, and MI-07, all of which per the map above were close to dead even in a PVI sense. I must say, MI-14 looks ever more interesting as a CD; it is getting to be quite a work of art!  I also manged to get Garden City into MI-07 (labeled MI-08 in the map below; I will change the number for next time to the proper one).  

[Torie]

You appear to have cut Center Line off from the rest of MI-12 on that map, Torie.

 

Appearances can be deceiving. I do make mistakes in maps, but that is not one of them.   Thanks however for the comment, and anytime you think you see a flaw, I would appreciate your letting me know. I must say, that at this point, I think I know almost every Warren precinct by heart now, as the precincts go into MI-13, and then out again, and then in, and then out, and on and on.

[Torie]

Here is the tentative map. I think I broke the code about county splits per Michigan law. You start with one clean line, and from the opposite side of the state, limit one CD to just one chop.

In 2000, the clean line was the north end of MI-10, and the one chop CD was MI-01. In my map, the clean line is the east end of MI-07, and either MI-06 or MI-02 will have but one chop. Actually, MI-06 has no chops, but that is an accident. There will be a tiny chop. Whether MI-06 loses its excess of 700 folks by MI-02 dipping down into Allegan, or MI-03 doing the dip, is a choice, and an irrelevant one. So we have the same number of chops as the 2000 maps, less one for one fewer CD, but plus one, because the VRA requires an extra chop involving one of the two black CD's in Wayne, with either MI-12 taking the Pointes in Wayne, or one of the black CD's chopping into Macomb. I am very confident that this map is legal.

That aside, I think the partisan numbers will work pretty well, with a lot of weak safe to lean GOP CD's, with maybe MI-07 slipping into the the marginal category, with a GOP lean.

My main concern is MI-03. It may have been put under too much stress, taking in both Lansing, and losing a lot of Kent County suburbs, although the big one MI-02 took is probably fairly Dem per the demographics. The pawns may have to be shifted around in Kent. It may be that the black precincts in the city of Grand Rapids will have to be split up between MI-02 and MI-03. And maybe MI-04 will have to drop Ionia, and be jiggled around. That is the potential weak spot in the map - the issue being just how to most effectively neutralize Lansing - to the extent it can be.

Oh yes, I know that one CD is off by about 3,000 folks, but I have no intention of playing with the other 13 less than 1,000 in population off CD's to deal with that.

[Torie]

What's the PVI on that Grand Rapids-Lansing seat? It can't be better for the GOP than marginal.

I don't know; that was the concern that I expressed in my post above.  You may well  be right. But in the end, both MI-02 and MI-03 I suspect can be made weak safe to strong lean GOP CD's - with a PVI of from say 2.5 to 3.5. It just requires the right chop of Kent, and maybe weakening MI-04 a bit. Yes, the map is on the cusp. The GOP may just dump the law. A lot of efficiency is lost by putting all those Pubbie link townships in Oakland in MI-05, and MI-11 sucking up GOP friendly Livonia, and Northville, and Plymouth in Wayne. That is what the law does, if given a tight interpretation, with not much play afforded in what is deemed "reasonable," a term that is used in the law when it comes to chops.

The big winner in playing this legal game, is the Pubbie in MI-01. That dude will be thrilled!    It was due in part to the imperative of MI-10 having clean lines on its north end. MI-01 was drawn almost in its entirely to accommodate other considerations.

[Torie]

Is the goal here to hit the minimum number of county line breaks according to the current counting methods?  I see

2 in Wayne
1 in each of Oakland, Macomb, Kent, Ingham, Washtenaw, Saginaw, Genesee, St. Clair, Grand Traverse, and one TBA involving CD-06

for a total of 12, whereas the theoretical minimum is 9.  

Below is the 2000 map. It has 13 chops for 15 CD's, for an efficiency rating of 2:

Oakland 3
Wayne 2
Bay 1
Saginaw 1
Calhoun 1
Allegan 1
Kent 1
Washtenaw 1
Shiawassee 1
Macomb 1

It has 3 single chop CD's: MI-10, MI-01 and MI-03.

My map also has 13 chops, for an efficiency rating of 1 with 14 CD's:

Wayne 2
Oakland 2
Macomb 1
St. Clair 1
Genessee 1
Saginaw 1
Grand Traverse 1
Calhoun 1 (CD-06)
Kent 1
Ingham 1
Washtenaw 1

I have 4 single chop CD's: MI-07, MI-01, MI-02 and MI-06.  The loss of one point in efficiency is due to 1) the VRA forcing MI-14 into Macomb, which generates an extra chop, since MI-14 is not wholly within Wayne, and 2) a triple chop of MI-05. As to MI-14 chopping into Macomb, it is either that chop, or MI-12 chopping into Wayne to suck up the Pointes. The map should be legal.

Addendum: And now I got rid of the St. Clair chop (pity that, as it slides MI-12 into an almost dead even marginal), so now I have an efficiency rating of 2, just like the 2000 map, with 12 chops for 14 CD's. The thing is, is that without a chop of Genesee, Saginaw, Ingham and Wastenaw, and the Oakland county contortions, the map really falls apart for the Pubbies. So those needed to be preserved at all costs. I don't think the Pubbies are going to like the PVI numbers much however. There will be a lot of marginal CD's. The Michigan law in short, is in trouble. But the map is not DOA; it's not great, but not horrible either. But all those marginals could be made safe, without all of this county split "silliness."  (The township and city chop thing is not that much of an inconvenience; it just makes the map drawing a bit more time consuming, as one plots how to get most of what one wants, and one does usually get it.)



And here is another version that might work out a bit better. In the first version, MI-02 and MI-03 between them had a GOP PVI of around 2.1%, which is hardly inspiring. This version gets Ionia into the MI-02 and MI-03 zone, in exchange for losing  some territory to MI-01 at the north end of MI-02 which has a Dem PVI of about 3 points. I also tried having MI-04 take Lansing, but that generates an extra chop. A Kent based CD needs to take it.

[Torie]

Torie, you weren't paying attention to how Muon described the current (very dumb) counting procedure.  In the current map, since CD-09 is entirely contained in Oakland, it only counts as having 2 chops.  Wayne has only 1 chop currently.  The total is 11; efficiency 4.  In post #220 Muon describes how to get a chop count of 9 for 14 districts.  

I agree that the method for counting chops is stupid and ought to be changed irrespective of what gerrymanders it allows...

I counted two chops for Oakland. As for Wayne, the 2000 map has one chop for MI-11, and one for MI-15, unless you are going to start counting from Wayne. My maps and Muon's, have an extra chop because MI-14 is no longer contained in Wayne, but that is required by the VRA, or MI-12 dropping into the Pointes.

In any event, the map below should have fewer chops (MI-05 has but one, and indeed that does reduce the chops to 11), and this map I think might actually work for the Pubbies, although MI-10 will be somewhat marginal, but that will be an open seat. The trick was to switch MI-11 for MI-08 in Wayne. And MI-07 will remain marginal, but slightly more GOP than the number I came up when I did the MI-07 calculations before. It is either this map, or change the law. Come to think of it, MI-08 could take MI-07's territory in Wayne perhaps, if there is a way to deal with the township and city chops, while keeping both MI-13 and MI-15 50% black. That might save another chop, but perhaps not, since MI-07 has only the Wayne chop, and clean lines elsewhere.

[Torie]

Does Michigan allow touch-point contiguity between municipalities?

You mean like my precinct link in Dearborn Heights connecting  MI-14 from the east to its salient in western Wayne?  The law does not say no. What it does say, is that if you have a CD connected with but a theoretical point where one corner of two rectangles touch,  that does not constitute contiguousness.

Come to think of it, the Dems might be fairly happy with this map. Dingell retires, Levin gets MI-11, and Peters can move from Bloomfield Hills a couple of miles to the east in Lapeer County and run in marginal MI-10. MI-07 is marginal to boot, and MI-08 will be somewhat vulnerable to marginal, if Rogers retires. Candice Miller in MI-12 has a marginal seat with a GOP PVI of around 1%.Whether the GOP will stand for this map, as opposed to just deep-six the law is another question.

The guy who would  be deliriously happy however is McCotter. He would be moving from Livonia a mile or two north up to Novi or somewhere ASAP per this map, and never have to campaign again. He could use his campaign money to give to others to buy influence; maybe he will be speaker someday.  MI-09 might be a serious competitor for the most GOP CD in the state.

[Torie]

OK, you're down to 12 county splits by the current metrics.  That's the same as in my map in post 225, which has 4 Dem districts and every GOP district (save one) over 54.5% Bush.  

And sorry to continue to be a pain, but you have too many township splits in Wayne.  I see Sumpter Twp, Canton, Detroit, Taylor, and Dearborn Heights split, when you really should only need 3 splits between the 4 districts.  

Incidentally, you could improve things by exploiting the loophole that 1 whole district + 2 partials in a county is the same as 1 whole + 1 partial.  Give some parts of Oakland (Farmington, South Lyon) to CD-08 and let CD-11 take more of the Ann Arbor area.  

I very much appreciate your comments, dpmapper. They are usually spot on. But as to splits, the Detroit split is between MI-13 and MI-14 (and is mandated by the VRA to boot), the Sumpter split is between MI-07 and MI-08, the Canton split between MI-14 and MI-08, and the Taylor split is between MI-07 and MI-13.  I think that is legal. The splits have to be made to equalize population, and to get both MI-14 and MI-13 above 50% black VAP. The language in the law on which I rely reads as follows: "(v) If it is necessary to break city or township lines to achieve equality of population between congressional districts as provided in subdivision (a), the number of people necessary to achieve population equality shall be shifted between the 2 districts affected by the shift." (Emphasis added.)

Of course, I put the splits to dual uses almost always, but well, if one did not do that, what raison d'etre would gerrymanderers have?  

By the way, you missed the Dearborn Heights chop between MI-14 and MI-07.   One chop is allowed between any two CD's is the rule I think. (Notice how given the Detroit chop, I avoided any other chop between MI-13 and MI-14.)

I don't agree that one CD in a  county plus two partials constitutes but one split, which "loophole" that you presume exists I see that you exploited to the max in your map. I know of no language in the law suggesting such a counter-intuitive interpretation,  and thus am puzzled as to the basis that that inference was drawn.  Counting that way really does not make any sense. As a judge I certainly would not accept that interpretation based on what I know so far. But I would appreciate your sharing with me your reasoning on this issue.

I might note that Muon2 and I had a discussion about this (sort of).  My view was that two partials only count as one split if both partials are but one CD in two non-contiguous chops into a county. If the partial chops into a county are two different CD's, that counts as two chops. Muon2 in a later post came around to agreeing with that method of counting chops, which is the only one that makes any sense really.

[Torie]

I see your point about the chops in Wayne, but  your solution pushes MI-14 below 50% black VAP, and thus cannot be done. Canton is blacker than Livonia. And the three precincts lost to MI-14 in Dearborn Heights are substantially black to boot.

I see that you got you extra chop in Shiawassee (sp) by making the west end of the gray CD have clean lines in the west. That is very creative, and allows the greater efficiency of MI-05 taking out Saginaw City. What is you chop county for MI-01? Your map does not show it. Part of the problem, is that your graphics make your maps hard to read for me. I wish folks would use screen shots. In any event, I will try to rip off that aspect of your map, if I can make it work. But Shiawassee has a Dem PVI in 2008 of about 3%-4%, so it is hardly a home run. But it is certainly a single, and maybe a double.

You MI-07 or MI-08 that pokes into Wayne is a Dem lean CD, maybe weak safe Dem CD. Your gray CD is at most but lean GOP. But you make both MI-12 and MI-10 considerably more GOP than my map in compensation, it looks like. Your map is a lot uglier than mine however, and that is not totally irrelevant. Cosmetics matter, and I pay considerable attention to that. You get ugly only when you really have to. Both our maps are a mess in the Detroit metro area of course.

The law does mention compactness by the way, way down the list, after the other imperatives are met. So a really ugly map to get partisan advantage might be vulnerable to the presentation to the court of another map.

I am impressed dpmapper with your talent at this - very impressed.

Oh yes, the way Muon2 counts just isn't going to be accepted by any court. I am going to pull legal rank on Muon2 on this one. I know that if I were a judge I certainly would not accept his formula, with open season for everybody to chop into a county after the first bite, if it has one wholly contained CD. That is why I think he abandoned his only the first bite counts concept, sort of the "one bite" rule in reverse; instead of your dog getting one free bite before you are sued for negligence with the second bite, you go to jail for the first bite, and then all the rest are just great. I don't think so!  

Muon2 wrote this: "I would now conclude that if two discontiguous parts of a county are attached to other counties, but not to the same district then that counts as two county breaks."  Assuming the word "discontiguous" is used to allow two chops by one CD into another county in different spots as counting as but one chop, fine. If it means that if two chops into a county by two different CD's, where the chops are next to each other, counts as but one chop, that's ludicrous. That cannot possibly be what Muon1 meant. He's a lot smarter than that.

[Torie]

You MI-07 or MI-08 that pokes into Wayne is a Dem lean CD, maybe weak safe Dem CD. Your gray CD is at most but lean GOP. But you make both MI-12 and MI-10 considerably more GOP than my map in compensation, it looks like. Your map is a lot uglier than mine however, and that is not totally irrelevant. Cosmetics matter, and I pay considerable attention to that. You get ugly only when you really have to. Both our maps are a mess in the Detroit metro area of course.

The part-Wayne CD is at 53.06% Bush '04, slightly better than McCotter's current district.  As I mentioned earlier, I suspect that the southern tier of Wayne suburbs and Monroe County are trending GOP.  Monroe's Obama percentage was -1.6 from where he was nationally, whereas for Kerry it was +.4.  Nor did Dingell do well in these places last year.  The grey CD that takes part of Washtenaw is at 54.67% Bush, though it might be trending the other way.  See post #236 for more numbers. 

 I noticed your recent tallying has been using '08 numbers, whereas way back you were working with '04 numbers - why'd you switch?  

The Bush numbers were on the Leips site, and the McCain numbers were not. But now there are all available at the Michigan Secretary of State's office, and I wanted to see the trends. It is also a good way to see what the rather hard core GOP vote is, outside of lower income whites. In the end, determining what is an acceptable PVI is a judgement call, and trends, and demographics, etc., play a part.

As an aside, I suspect the higher income precincts for example in 2012 will trend pretty heavily GOP. I don't meet many folks these days who have much good to say Obama's leadership in that department. The confidence is simply gone. It will be interesting to see how well Obama does in 2012 with the Asian vote as well.

[Torie]

dpmapper, I am still playing with your map (subject to a delay, as I enrich turbotax with a multiplicity of tax returns that I am saddled with generating), but it appears more and more likely that you have drawn the best map that can possibly be drawn in its overall design, if not necessarily the assigning of every precinct, although in general you are spot on there as well. Your clearly know what you are doing, and are one very smart puppy!  The geography between Grand Rapids and Ann Arbor is such, along with county populations, that the options are very limited.

[Torie]

Not a bad map. They just threw in the towel on creating a marginal seat, and didn't beef up Rogers in the 8th all that much, while making MI-01 safe. Whether it is "legal" or not is another matter. I am not going to get into that again. That was a nightmare!

[Torie]

Huh, they're going for two Oakland/Wayne districts.  I guess they'll argue that they're forced to do so by VRA considerations. 

But if you can do two such districts, why not go for 9-4-1, rather than 9-5?  Pretty conservative. 

The interesting thing about this map is that they take Battle Creek and Mark Schauer out of Walberg's district.  Smart. 

Except that they aren't "forced" to by the VRA as we well know.   But I think ceding the Dems a seat is going to cause that most interesting law to not be parsed that closely. Who in God's green earth would want to anyway?

[Torie]

Pretty sure the Sander Levin district drops to about 52-53% Kerry or so, and 59% Obama. It dropped its best portions.

It lost Southfield, but picked up Pontiac, and some marginally Dem areas in Macomb. It's Dem PVI is not going to drop that much. 

[Torie]

Pretty sure the Sander Levin district drops to about 52-53% Kerry or so, and 59% Obama. It dropped its best portions.

It lost Southfield, but picked up Pontiac, and some marginally Dem areas in Macomb. It's Dem PVI is not going to drop that much.  

Doesn't look like it; Pontiac is in the black district. Bloomfield is in the Levin district.

Or am I seeing things?

I calculated the Macomb portion with the Macomb SoS data. Problem is the normally excellent Michigan SoS website is broken.

Yes, I was typing a recantation when I lost my work on this laptop that I hate because my computer died. What I thought was Pontiac is part of Bloomfield Township, Bloomfield Hills, Birmingham, and Beverly Hills, all lean to solid GOP territory. So it indeed looks like it might be about a 2-3 Dem PVI CD as you suggest. It's lean Dem, and Levin would have lost it in 2010.

The mappy is too small for my tired eyes, but this is one area of the fruited plain where I think I know almost every precinct by heart now.

[Torie]

Pretty sure the Sander Levin district drops to about 52-53% Kerry or so, and 59% Obama. It dropped its best portions.

It lost Southfield, but picked up Pontiac, and some marginally Dem areas in Macomb. It's Dem PVI is not going to drop that much.  

Look again, Torie - Pontiac is in the 14th.  The parts of Macomb it picked up are in Sterling Heights, so roughly even.  If the goal is to make 9 swingier, I'd tweak the border with MI-11 a bit.  MI-11 was already quite safe and they've made it safer by adding the rest of the thumb, so you could put Mt. Clemens and other parts of SE Macomb into MI-11 quite easily.  

Yes, the Macomb carve up needs some work if the GOP is going for the throat.  They apparently are not worried about all that county split sh*t that so obsessed us, and that only you totally mastered!  

Ideally, you jiggle things so that Levin takes the rest of Sterling Heights, and Miller in the thumb CD takes Mt. Clemens, and slices through Clinton to suck up all of Roseville. That might mean Levin needs to pick up something in Oakland, or take all of Macomb Township as well or something (taking all of Shelby would probably be too many people). You do that and you have a lean GOP CD I think.

[Torie]

One little flaw in the ointment is the area I put X's over in Oakland. The three burbs plus the south end of Royal Oak where Levin actually lives are small, but totally toxic to the GOP. Ferndale for example is where BRTD would live if he lived in the Detroit metro area. Enough said.

[Torie]

Below is the way to do it, putting aside the Ferndale, Huntington Woods, and Pleasant Ridge issue over which I have put two little white boxes to depict my displeasure at the Dem scabs appending this CD.



Oh, I don't think now that I look more carefully (that map is so hard to read!), that the Levin CD has the precincts in Clawson in it, which is inconvenient. We are 8,000 folks short after taking in the last available precinct in Clinton. Oh well, some other stuff has to be moved, which I leave to others!

[Torie]

One little flaw in the ointment is the area I put X's over in Oakland. The three burbs plus the south end of Royal Oak where Levin actually lives are small, but totally toxic to the GOP. Ferndale for example is where BRTD would live if he lived in the Detroit metro area. Enough said.

It would be controversial for sure, but if I was the GOP, I would put the Pointes in the Levin district and move those 3 suburbs into the black district.

Ah yes, yet another "illegal" county chop, but as it is, the Pubbie map has a certain noisome aspect to it from a legal aspect, so maybe the law is only intended to apply to Dem maps, or maybe the Pubbies will modify it as necessary, or something.

[Torie]

Here we go. We just draw a "spite strip" in the shape of an "L" hugging the northern and NW boundaries of St. Clair Shores containing 1,455 residents, and voila!  Piece of cake. Nobody has written that the existing precinct lines are the way God intended them, now have they?



And I think I see a way to get Ferndale, Pleasant Ridge and Huntington Woods into the black CD, MI-14, with Levin picking up Clawson and Birmingham, McCotter picking up Rochester, Rogers picking up territory in Oakland in McCotters NW corner, and then McCotter picking up almost all of West Bloomfield, except a spite strip to keep Pontiac hooked to MI-14.

But that means that for every move in PVI towards the Pubbies for the Levin CD, McCotter's goes in precisely the opposite direction.  So that won't happen of course. Levin will keep the terrible town trio.  So what I drew for Macomb, is the only pawn left to move I think to put the Pubbies in a better position against the Dems.

[Torie]

Well I played my favorite Farmington and Garden City tricks, and it's all better now.

Ya, I did an extra chop through Westland, but MI-11 had a chop to take from MI-13, and so it was taken. There is no read to be a veritable saint about these things.

[Torie]

MI-09, the Levin CD, is more Dem rather than less?  Are you sure Johnny?

[Torie]

MI-09, the Levin CD, is more Dem rather than less?  Are you sure Johnny?

The previous CD numbers are for MI-09. The old MI-12 was 65-33, which is a drop of about 7%.

That makes sense. And with a few simple "fixes," the drop would be about 9% or so, which gets it down close to a somewhat marginal CD, between a 2%-5% Dem PVI CD.