Re-Districting Information for Governors

[Akno21]

Another Re-Districting Plan from Akno

[Akno21]

The numbers for my plan are

D1 (New England): 28
D2 (Mid-Atlantic): 27
D3 (Southeast): 24
D4 (Midwest): 24
D5 (West): 24

[Fritz]

It does not matter where South Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas go.  For aesthetic purposes, I think these states should go into whatever district North Dakota goes to.

Those states aside, the only difference between Phils and Akno's plans are an excange of Ohio/West Virginia for Virginia between the current D3 and D2.  Phil's map is closer to the current map, therefore I find it preferable.

[Colin]

The Keystone Phil Re-Districting Plan

I like this map. This is probably the best one yet.

[Akno21]

It does not matter where South Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas go.  For aesthetic purposes, I think these states should go into whatever district North Dakota goes to.

Those states aside, the only difference between Phils and Akno's plans are an excange of Ohio/West Virginia for Virginia between the current D3 and D2.  Phil's map is closer to the current map, therefore I find it preferable.

What do you have against change

You ARE a liberal, you know, people who want to change things.

[Fritz]

Well, NickG is a liberal, too, and this is what he said (which I tend to agree with):

With redistricting every four months now, I feel like it is more important than ever to make adjustments to the existing map, rather than drawing new maps from scratch.  It's bad enough that Senators have to run in a different district in every election; we should make this as easy as possible for them while keeping the populations even.

[Akno21]

Well, NickG is a liberal, too, and this is what he said (which I tend to agree with):

With redistricting every four months now, I feel like it is more important than ever to make adjustments to the existing map, rather than drawing new maps from scratch.  It's bad enough that Senators have to run in a different district in every election; we should make this as easy as possible for them while keeping the populations even.

No Senators are from Virginia, Ohio, or West Virginia, so it's not like they have to change what district they run in, for the most part. I even think the party breakdown is similar, so not that much changes with my map.

[The Dowager Mod]

Doesn't this need to be done by a certain time?

[King]

I endorse Vice President Phil's Map!

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Phil's map is a partisan gerrymander. I oppose it.

[Fritz]

The Phil plan has an equitable distribution of registered voters (24-28) and is therefore constitutional.  It also has a reasonably equitable distributions of voters who voted in the last election, with 15-17 with the exception of the district NY is in, with 22.  (Given the high voter turnout in NY, that probably can't be helped).  It also has a minimum of changes to the current map.  D3 and D5 remain unchanged; D4 loses Virginia; D1 loses New York and gains Virginia, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Rhode Island (and gets re-named D2); and D2 loses New Jersey, Connecticut, and Rhode Island and gains New York (and gets re-named D1).  Akno's plan is very similar but I think makes unneceassary changes to D3.  I endorse the Phil plan.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's still a gerrymander

[Jake]

Phil's plan is good.

[DanielX]

My first (of many?) 5-district plans....



District 1:
New York
Vermont
New Hampshire
Maine
Rhode Island
Total: 24

District 2:
Massachusetts
Connecticut
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
Maryland
DC
Delaware
Total: 26

District 3:
Ohio
West Virginia
Virginia
Michigan
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Total: 25

District 4:
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Tennessee
Mississippi
Texas
New Mexico
Total: 26

District 5:
Iowa
North Dakota
Idaho
Washington
Oregon
California
Arizona
Hawaii
Total: 26

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

With 131 voters as of 2004.11.17:
Last Change: Cashcow +NJ on 2004.11.16

Here are the 6 current plans that are under my consideration as I prepare for the governors to convene to decide how to redistrict.  It will take a lot of persuading to convince me to support a plan that does not use the boundaries given above Districts 4 and 5 in all of these plans.  At the present, I have no preference for any of them.

Plan A (Minimum State Change):


Plan B (Phil):


Plan C (Akno21):


Plan D:


Plan E:


Plan F:

[DanielX]

My second 5-district map



District 1:
New York
Pennsylvania
Total: 26

District 2:
New Hampshire
Vermont
Maine
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
New Jersey
Delaware
Maryland
West Virginia
DC
Total: 25

District 3:
Same as plan 1, except add Tennessee and remove West Virginia
Total: 24

District 4:
Same as plan 1, except remove Tennessee
Total: 25

District 5:
Same as plan 1
Total: 26

Is it too late to propose further? If so, then of the plans shown, plans E and F are best.

[Keystone Phil]

It's still a gerrymander

In all honesty (and I know Al still won't believe me but anyway...) I made up the map not knowing the exact makeup politically. If I wanted to gerrymander it, I would have added NC instead of DE, RI, and CT.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

DanielX, feel free to propose what you wish.  I do not possess a veto over what will pass.  It requires two governors to block a plan from passage.  If any of the plans you propose can get two of the other governors to approve of them and the other two to abstain or approve, then they will pass.  In an abstract sense, I like the two plans you've put forth, and if we were doing districting without have existing districts to refer to, I would consider your plans to be worth considering.

[DanielX]

Just have one more (probably the last) plan (and almost certainly the oddest - California and Georgia together!)



District 1:
New York
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Total: 25

District 2:
Maine
Vermont
Connecticut
Rhode Island
Pennsylvania
New Jersey
DC
Delaware
Ohio
Total: 25

District 3:
Maryland
Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Florida
Tennessee
Illinois
Iowa
Total: 26

District 4:
Georgia
Mississippi
Texas
New Mexico
Arizona
California
Total: 26

District 5:
Michigan
Wisconsin
Minnesota
North Dakota
Idaho
Washington
Oregon
Hawaii
Total: 25

[The Dowager Mod]

your second one isn't bad.

[King]

The only problem with DanielX's 2nd map is that it requires 6 special elections:

1B: Replace IrishDemocrat (moved to D2)
2A: Replace Bono (moved to D1)
3A: Replace Texasgurl (moved to D5)
3B: Replace Nym90 (moved to D5)
4A; Replace StatesRights (moved to D3)
5A: Replace JFK (moved to D4)

Unless we want a complete overhaul of the Senate without waiting for election day, that map wouldn't work.

[The Dowager Mod]

this one?

[King]

this one?

Oh, sorry...I thought you were talking about the 3rd one...my mistake!

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The only problem with DanielX's 2nd map is that it requires 6 special elections:
     ⋮
Unless we want a complete overhaul of the Senate without waiting for election day, that map wouldn't work.

What special elections?
Districts only take effect for any new elections.  Even were a Senator to resign after the redistricting, the old map would still be used for any special election held for that seat.  While it is true that some of the maps that have been proposed would force incumbents to face each other in the next general election, existing Senators would hold their seats until then.

[Josh/Devilman88]

I like his 3rd plan. It makes it hareder for one party to rule over any dis.