Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 23, 2017, 05:34:05 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 318
51  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth Patterns in Metro Areas, 2000-16 on: June 02, 2017, 08:51:12 pm
Columbus, Ohio:



What's up with the wild population swings in Union Township, Madison County?
It has two prisons (London Correctional Institution and Madison Correctional Institution) which has a an address of London, but appears to be located in the township (Madison Township wraps around London, and the prisons are west and northwest of the city).

In 2010, 89% of the township population was male, and 78% was incarcerated.
52  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth Patterns in Metro Areas, 2000-16 on: June 02, 2017, 09:28:29 am
Boston:



Is (was) base housing for Hanscom AFB located in Lincoln.
53  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth Patterns in Metro Areas, 2000-16 on: June 02, 2017, 09:17:32 am
Southern Wisconsin (Milwaukee & Madison) would be awesome!

Southeastern Wisconsin:


It appears that the Census Bureau is making estimates at the county level, and then distributing that among the towns and cities within the counties.
54  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: June 01, 2017, 02:05:01 pm
Why is your division of the Cincinnati UCC acceptable? The concept of UCC is so that you can't have districts stretching outward from major cities. One of yours almost reaches Michigan, and the other reaches West Virginia, yet the majority of the population in each is in the Cincinnati suburbs.
Here is a possible scoring system:

Quota: Population of total area divided by number of elected persons.

Entitlement: Population of sub-area divided by quota. (e.g. the quota for Franklin County is 1.715).

Normalized Population: Population of an area divided by the quota. Conventionally, this is displayed as mixed decimal fraction with three digits of accuracy (to 0.1% of a district population), but should be computed as a rational number.

Magnitude: Entitlement trunctated to whole number that is less than equal to entitlement. Sub-areas with an entitlement of less than a quota have a magnitude of zero.

Sub-areas should have a number of districts equal to the magnitude wholly within them, and no more than magnitude plus one districts wholly or partially within them.

(1) Penalty for failure to have magnitude districts wholly within a sub-area:

Magnitude minus normalized population of the magnitude most populated districts wholly or partially within a sub-area.

(2) Penalty for excessive division:

Normalized population of smallest districts in excess of magnitude plus one largest districts.

(3) Penalty for inequality:

Population that would have to be shifted to reach full equality.

Example:

Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati UCC's have magnitude 2, while Dayton UCC has magnitude of 1. All other UCCs have magnitude of zero.

Franklin, Cuyahoga, and Hamilton counties have magnitude 1, all others have a magnitude of zero.

Columbus (Franklin) has magnitude 1, all others have a magnitude of one.

Scoring of Torie and Jimrtex plans.


Cleveland UCC (magnitude 2):

Torie does not have two districts wholly in UCC, but includes all of UCC within 3 districts. Penalty the portion of the second largest district outside the UCC (population of Ashtabula 0.123).

Jimrtex does have two districts wholly in UCC, but is divided among four districts. Penalty for fourth district (population of Medina 0.231).

Columbus UCC (magnitude 2):

Torie and Jimrtex both have two districts wholly within the UCC, and one district containing the remainder. No penalties.

Cincinnati UCC (magnitude 2):

Torie has one district wholly within the UCC, and two districts partially within the UCC. Penalty for portion of district outside Warren-Ashtabula district 0.432.

Jimrtex has two districts wholly in UCC and a third extending outside the UCC (no penalty)

Dayton UCC (magnitude 1):

Both Torie and Jimrtex have one district wholly in UCC (no penalty).

All other UCCs (magnitude 0):

All are wholly contained in a single district (no penalty)

(Dis)respect for UCC:

Torie: 0.555
Jimrtex: 0.232

Large counties: Franklin, Cuyahoga, Hamilton (magnitude 1)

Torie and Jimrtext have one district wholly in counties, and the remainder in a second district. No penalty.

Large city: Columbus (Franklin) (magnitude 1):

Jimrtex has one district almost entirely in Columbus, with only a full small enclaves preventing this. A small penalty of perhaps 0.030. Torie apparently has a more substantial division of Columbus, likely around 0.100 to 0.200.

Division of small counties/inequality:

It really doesn't matter whether a specific area has been identified as in Torie's map for Geauga, which would be classified as a county split, or simply whether a shift would be necessary to achieve equality. Jimrtex has an inequality of 0.220, with 0.101 of that due to the split of Clermont. Another 0.055 is due to balancing the Dayton and Akron districts, which are present in Tories districts. There is no reason to suppose that the remaining is materially different than Torie's plan.

Total Penalties:

UCC: T 0.555, J 0.232
Counties: T 0.000, J 0.000
Cities: T 0.100-0.200, J 0.030
Inequality: T 0.119, J 0.220

Total: T 0.764, J 0.482


55  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 31, 2017, 08:40:56 pm
Nice map, but you need to show the chops to score it.
It shows the chops, other than Columbus.

Well the Dayton area CD needs a chop for sure, along with a chop into Geauga. You must not be using the 0.5% variance in population constraint. If that is the case, then we are doing an apples to oranges exercise, with you having your own set of rules.

Is this a requirement in the US Constitution, or federal statute?


I don't want to revive that discussion, which you had with Muon2. Different metrics make different maps.

What if my map is qualitatively better?




Higher deviations in population tend to make for maps that fit the other constraints better. I have no idea what population constraint you are using. But it doesn't matter. It is going to be enough of a tough sell to push the 0.5% constraint, that seems pretty safe legally, assuming the states agree to it. Anyway, do your thing.  You will anyway. Smiley

Why is your division of the Cincinnati UCC acceptable? The concept of UCC is so that you can't have districts stretching outward from major cities. One of yours almost reaches Michigan, and the other reaches West Virginia, yet the majority of the population in each is in the Cincinnati suburbs.
56  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 31, 2017, 08:25:58 pm
Nice map, but you need to show the chops to score it.
It shows the chops, other than Columbus.

Well the Dayton area CD needs a chop for sure, along with a chop into Geauga. You must not be using the 0.5% variance in population constraint. If that is the case, then we are doing an apples to oranges exercise, with you having your own set of rules.

Is this a requirement in the US Constitution, or federal statute?


I don't want to revive that discussion, which you had with Muon2. Different metrics make different maps.

What if my map is qualitatively better?
Higher deviations in population tend to make for maps that fit the other constraints better. I have no idea what population constraint you are using. But it doesn't matter. It is going to be enough of a tough sell to push the 0.5% constraint, that seems pretty safe legally, assuming the states agree to it. Anyway, do your thing.  You will anyway. Smiley
A primary reason that the SCOTUS has resisted setting de minimis deviation standards, is that the limits become targets. A scoring system that favors certain thresholds makes them targets.

My map is based on seeking equality within the constraint of respecting county boundaries and UCC communities of interest. The constraint certainly was not to get within some predefined limit. So it is possible that the Muon2 method is not safe legally.

The equality of my plan can be measured by determining the number of persons who would have to be shifted across county lines in order to achieve equality. That is, a measure of whether you were attempting to hit the target or not. It is also a measure of the number of persons victimized by an obsessive compulsion to equalize population.

169,348 persons can be shifted to equalize population, but 77,000 of those are in Clermont. Otherwise it is only 91,519 statewide or about 1/126 Ohioans.

My districts are as equal as practicable, which is the standard set by the SCOTUS for congressional districts.
57  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 31, 2017, 05:22:49 pm
Nice map, but you need to show the chops to score it.
It shows the chops, other than Columbus.

Well the Dayton area CD needs a chop for sure, along with a chop into Geauga. You must not be using the 0.5% variance in population constraint. If that is the case, then we are doing an apples to oranges exercise, with you having your own set of rules.

Is this a requirement in the US Constitution, or federal statute?


I don't want to revive that discussion, which you had with Muon2. Different metrics make different maps.

What if my map is qualitatively better?


58  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 31, 2017, 04:02:03 pm
Nice map, but you need to show the chops to score it.
It shows the chops, other than Columbus.

Well the Dayton area CD needs a chop for sure, along with a chop into Geauga. You must not be using the 0.5% variance in population constraint. If that is the case, then we are doing an apples to oranges exercise, with you having your own set of rules.

Is this a requirement in the US Constitution, or federal statute?
59  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 31, 2017, 09:33:46 am
Nice map, but you need to show the chops to score it.
It shows the chops, other than Columbus.
60  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 30, 2017, 11:43:33 pm
Final map including four divided counties: Franklin, Cuyahoga, Hamilton, and Clermont. The first three have population for more than one district, and one district is wholly within each.



61  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Are there really more Americans of German ancestry than English ancestry? on: May 30, 2017, 11:20:37 pm
Why is there an easily findable ancestry map for the 2000 census, but not for the 2010 census? Was ancestry asked in 2010?
I don't believe it was ... I'm working on getting a county ancestry map put together for just European ancestry (so, % of Whites in that state who identify with each European ancestry, pretty much) and with English and American added together, but I have only JUST finished Illinois. Sad
Responses of non-white ancestry are recorded by the Census Bureau, but their tabular ancestry in American Fact Finder, excludes Asian, NHOPI, Hispanic, AIAN, and African American, most of which are included under the racial or ethnic categories.

The Census Bureau does not actually ask if someone is of "Asian" race. They have a number of specific "races" such as Chinese, Japanese, etc. which they aggregate as Asian. Presumably, most people who say that their "race" is Vietnamese also indicate Vietnamese ancestry. There are similar separation for Hispanic (Mexican, Puerto Rican, Dominican, Hispanic/Spanish). African American ancestry is not included in the ancestry data, but other ancestries generally considered black, such as Jamaican or Nigerian are). So you could estimate African American ancestry as being the same as Black-non Hispanic excluding other black ancestries.

In 2000, German was the largest ancestry from Pennsylvania through the Midwest and pushing out to the West Coast, excluding only Utah. By 2000, German was also the largest ancestry in Alaska, Oklahoma, and Florida.

African American was the largest ancestry along the southern coast from Louisiana to Maryland.

Irish was the largest ancestry in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Delaware, English the largest in Maine, Vermont, and Utah, Mexican in the four border states; and Japanese the largest in Hawaii. Italian is the largest in Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey.

American was the largest in the Inland South: West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Arkansas. These areas have seen particularly large drops in reported English ancestry.
62  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Are there really more Americans of German ancestry than English ancestry? on: May 30, 2017, 10:50:54 pm
Why is there an easily findable ancestry map for the 2000 census, but not for the 2010 census? Was ancestry asked in 2010?
The ancestry question was on the long form, asked of a sample (about 1/6 of households). The short form only asks:

Tenure for dwelling: (owned, rented, mortgaged, squatting)

For each individual:
Relationship (to first person on form, spouse, child, parent, sibling, etc.)
Sex,
Age,
Ethnicity: Not Hispanic or Hispanic: (Mexican, Puerto Rican, etc.)
Race: (White, Black, AIAN: enrolled tribe, (Asian), (NHOPI), other

The Long Form has been replaced with the American Community Survey (ACS). The ACS is a monthly survey, which over a five-year period has the same sampling rate as the Long Form. Because it is done monthly, only about 300,000 households are sampled each month, vs. 20,000,000 households one month every ten years. This means that the Census Bureau can have full-time staff to follow up for non-response, etc; compared to the regular census, when they are also having to follow up on the short form.

Because responses over a five-year period are combined, the ACS is more like a time-lapse photo. But it may also be combined on a sliding basis.

Instead of a sharp image every 10 years, you get a somewhat smeared image, updated annually 2007-2011, 2008-2012, ..., which may provide better trend information.

In 2004, following the 2000 Census, the Census Bureau issued a special report on Ancestry - which generated the 2000 maps showing the largest ancestry in each county.

It would be possible to do the same for the ACS, but the Census Bureau has not put together a comprehensive report.
63  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 30, 2017, 07:04:19 pm
Cincinnati UCC detail.



OH-5 is Hamilton County minus a few slivers along the eastern edge.

OH-6 is Butler, Warren, the slivers from Hamilton, and northern Clermont, generally closer to the city.

OH-7 is the remainder of Clermont attached to 17 other counties in southern Ohio.
64  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth Patterns in Metro Areas, 2000-16 on: May 30, 2017, 12:23:28 pm
Great stuff. If you could do the DC-NoVA-Metro area next that would be awesome.

I will, after I fix the NYC Metro gif to a better projection (NAD 83 (HARN): Long Island looks better than what I have). 

Unfortunately, you're going to lose a lot of the granularity south of the Mason-Dixon Line and west of the Mississippi, though, since those states don't have MCDs that census provides data for, and there are no yearly estimates for fictional areas like CDPs, which replace MCDs there.

You could conceivably use ACS estimates for census tracts or block groups. You would have to use the five-year estimates, but could use 2011-2015 for 2013; 2010-2014 for 2012, etc.
65  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 30, 2017, 12:20:10 pm
This is my detail for the Columbus area:



The OH-3 Green Monster includes Columbus, Bexley, and Perry and Clinton townships. 138,000 in Columbus needs to be transferred to OH-4 to equalize population. This would initially close the crevasse south of Dublin and link Prairie, Franklin, and Sharon townships, as well as provide a connection to Whitehall and Reynoldsburg. Some smaller remnants of townships may be switched to OH-3. The main criteria would be whether more of Columbus would need to be added, than the area that could be rescued.

Perry and Clinton townships are highly fragmented and only have about 4,000 each. Bexley is largely white, and to reach it would require a link through largely black areas. This would mean that the link would be as thin as possible, which gives a strong scent of race-sorting. Whitehall might also be included in the district. It is 19% Black (in 2010) and increasing.

This is a conceptual drawing.



The yellow boundary connects all of OH-4. The red X indicate areas that might be filled in to make OH-3 more compact, based on available population.
66  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth Patterns in Metro Areas, 2000-16 on: May 30, 2017, 09:16:51 am

Is there something odd about the projection? It seems a bit stretched east-west.

There might be.  I used the census default projection on QGIS without reprojecting it to Albers Conic or whatever.  It's NAD 83 (EPSG:4269).  But Long Island is really long, which might make it look like it's stretched (plus, my water file leads to more water than there really is being shown, which probably makes Long Island seem longer than it really is.  

What projection should I be using?  Albers makes things conic, so stuff isn't oriented the way you normally see it on a map.
NAD 83 is Latitude/Longitude so at NYC (roughly 40N), North/South is shortened by cos(40 degrees) or 0.76.

I notice it in the northern border of New Jersey and in diagonally oriented squarish towns, which become more diamond shaped.

There is something called False Mercator which QGIS switches to when display a Google satellite layer. I think this has something to do with the tiling of the Google images. For small areas you don't have to worry about area distortion. If you were interested in comparing the size of different metro areas (Miami v Boston) you might want to switch to more localized coordinate systems.
67  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 30, 2017, 12:46:31 am
This is my detail for the two Cuyahoga districts.



1. Cleveland and eastern suburbs. -1.1%
2. Western and southern suburbs, and Lorain -0.9%. About 60% is in Cuyahoga, 40% in Lorain, which would make it about 75-80% suburbs, with the rest Lorain and Elyria and more rural parts of the county.

The Cleveland district is about as black as you can get in Cuyahoga County, and is pretty compact.
68  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Population Growth Patterns in Metro Areas, 2000-16 on: May 30, 2017, 12:40:12 am
Now that I have the population estimate data for 2000-16 in a readable format, I can make gifs of the growth patterns in metro areas.  First, the greater NYC Metro Area:



Note how there was an exodus from the Inner suburbs until around 2008, followed by an exodus from the exurbs in the 2010s.

What metro should I make next?

The Nassau-Suffolk line is interesting. Also the Poconos. Is that people families moving out, or adult children moving away, as happened in Nassau in the 70s (there was the huge influx following WWII, and then 15-25 years later all the children were grown. The adults were still around 50-60, so not ready to vacate their homes, and there wasn't yet infill of apartments. The children who formed families had to move out to Suffolk. Those without, could move to NYC, or wherever they ended up for college, or North Carolina, Florida, etc. where they met a mate from somewhere else.

Is there something odd about the projection? It seems a bit stretched east-west.
69  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: US House Redistricting: Texas on: May 29, 2017, 11:26:04 pm
Jim, your disagreement is with the Republicans in the TX legislature who fear the courts will fix TX's Congressional map if they don't draw a legally passable map themselves. I'm struggling to reconcile their worry with your posts.

https://www.texastribune.org/2017/05/25/texas-republicans-congress-hope-special-session/

Huh? Did you read the article?


I encourage you to read the article, Jim.

Which Republican legislators were mentioned in the article?

Aha, now I see the goal of the the Socratic dialogue—it's Republican legislators from Texas in the U.S. Congress who are crapping their pants about the courts redrawing the map.

Randy Weber is one of the Republican legislators quoted in the article. 
Randy Weber is not in the Texas legislature. The other congressman quoted, Bill Flores, says that lawyers have all kinds of opinions.
70  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: US House Redistricting: Texas on: May 29, 2017, 05:55:29 pm
Jim, your disagreement is with the Republicans in the TX legislature who fear the courts will fix TX's Congressional map if they don't draw a legally passable map themselves. I'm struggling to reconcile their worry with your posts.

https://www.texastribune.org/2017/05/25/texas-republicans-congress-hope-special-session/

Huh? Did you read the article?


I encourage you to read the article, Jim.

Which Republican legislators were mentioned in the article?
71  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 29, 2017, 12:54:18 pm
Here is my district map.



1,2. Cleveland -1.0% Cuyahoga divided
3,4. Columbus -0.6% Franklin divided.
5,6, and 7. Cincinnati and Southern (Hamilton and Clermont (or Warren) divided +0.7%.
8. Dayton +2.9%
9. Akron +2.6%
10. Toledo -0.5%
11. Youngstown -4.0%
12. Canton -0.6%
13. East -1.2%
14. North +1.4%
15. West 0.7%
72  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: US House Redistricting: Texas on: May 29, 2017, 12:16:52 pm
Jim, your disagreement is with the Republicans in the TX legislature who fear the courts will fix TX's Congressional map if they don't draw a legally passable map themselves. I'm struggling to reconcile their worry with your posts.

https://www.texastribune.org/2017/05/25/texas-republicans-congress-hope-special-session/

Huh? Did you read the article?
73  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: SC strikes down NC gerrymander 5 - 3, Thomas joins liberal majority on: May 29, 2017, 04:47:02 am
So does this mean the CD will change again?

What are all these NC redistricting cases?

The federal court whose decision the SCOTUS just confirmed had accepted the new (current) districts drawn by the legislature. The plaintiffs have appealed that decision to the SCOTUS.

There are also separate cases challenging the maps as partisan gerrymanders. They have not had trial.

There is another case appealing the NC Supreme Court decision which was opposite of that of the federal court.
74  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Ohio - a celebration of the Muon2 rules on: May 29, 2017, 12:32:17 am
This is the base map, showing projected populations for 2020, assuming 15 congressional districts.



Cleveland 2.504 districts. Stripping Lake and Medina, gives 1.979 for Cuyahoga and Lorain. This could result in Cleveland and the eastern suburbs in one district; and Lorain and the western and southern suburbs.

Columbus 2.411 districts. Franklin and Delaware together is 1.987, resulting in one district with the bulk of Columbus and southern suburbs in one district, and the remainder of Franklin and Delaware in the other. The smaller counties of Licking and Fairfield will form almost 1/2 of another district.

Cincinnati 2.101 districts. A small part of one of the suburban counties will be trimmed off. Hamilton is just over one district, but might have a tiny bit trimmed off.

Dayton 1.029 districts. The UCC can form a district.

Akron 0.905 districts. Adding Geauga has a population of 1.026.

Toledo 0.719 districts. Because of its isolation, the UCC will form the nucleus of a district extending into adjoining counties.

Youngstown 0.544 districts. Youngstown could conceivably be paired with Canton, but by taking up Ashtabula and Lake reacheds 0.960.

Canton 0.481 districts. Canton will be paired with Medina, to contain the five northeastern districts in the most urban areas.

Springfield 0.172 districts. Because Dayton will form a single district. Springfield (Clark County) will be treated as an isolated county.

Mansfield 0.153, Lima 0.132, Wheeling, WV 0.087, Steubenville 0.084, and Huntington, WV 0.077 will be treated as isolated counties.
75  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: US House Redistricting: Texas on: May 28, 2017, 05:05:52 pm
The legislature should take the opportunity...


The legislature is passing on redistricting. If any maps are drawn, it will be by the federal courts.

So we'll probably have court-drawn maps for 2018, no?
There has not been a trial yet. If the court has already prepared maps, that would be a violation of due process, no?

The trial on the maps that were imposed by the court in 2012, ratified by the legislature in 2013, and used in 2012, 2014, and 2016 is scheduled for this summer.

The court asked if Texas wanted to draw yet another set of maps - perhaps so they wouldn't have to rule on the legality of the maps that they imposed. Remember that one judge on the three-judge panel says that once they ruled on the 2011 maps, the case should have been closed. There is a possibility that the court no longer has jurisdiction. On appeal to the SCOTUS that will be an issue.

In any event, Texas would be expected to draw a new map pre-assuming what the decision of a trial court will be for what has not yet been tried. Given the appeal to the SCOTUS it is not clear whether that can be done before 2018. Perhaps 2020.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 318


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines