US House Redistricting: Colorado

[Senator Sbane]

Yes, I think you pretty much nailed it. At least in the Denver area.

Part of the problem I had with this is that nobody wants to be attached to the Denver district and be ~100k forgotten residents. Once you figure out who the unlucky souls are the rest of the map is fairly obvious.

That's why giving North West Aurora to them is the best choice. They are resonably dem

Yeah best choice for the pubbies for sure. Or just join it with certain areas of Adams County. Of course the Dems are going to want to expand south.

[Dgov]

Yes, I think you pretty much nailed it. At least in the Denver area.

Part of the problem I had with this is that nobody wants to be attached to the Denver district and be ~100k forgotten residents. Once you figure out who the unlucky souls are the rest of the map is fairly obvious.

That's why giving North West Aurora to them is the best choice. They are reasonably dem

And fairly minority too.  I assume that counts for something since Colorado still doesn't have a VRA district

[Bacon King]

Yes, I think you pretty much nailed it. At least in the Denver area.

Part of the problem I had with this is that nobody wants to be attached to the Denver district and be ~100k forgotten residents. Once you figure out who the unlucky souls are the rest of the map is fairly obvious.

That's why giving North West Aurora to them is the best choice. They are reasonably dem

And fairly minority too.  I assume that counts for something since Colorado still doesn't have a VRA district

Doesn't legally count for anything, since no minority in Colorado passes the Gingles threshold. Not that it won't be considered by the mapmakers, though, if they want to do it for community of interest reasons or what-not.

[krazen1211]

Yes, I think you pretty much nailed it. At least in the Denver area.

Part of the problem I had with this is that nobody wants to be attached to the Denver district and be ~100k forgotten residents. Once you figure out who the unlucky souls are the rest of the map is fairly obvious.

That's why giving North West Aurora to them is the best choice. They are resonably dem

Yep. Colorado is one state where I'd hope that both sides could come to an agreement; a 3-3-1 plan seems quite reasonable given the last decade of electoral history.

[Senator Sbane]

Actually I think it will be quite similar to the current map. Marginally 4-3 Republican.

[krazen1211]

Democrats trying to cram CD-5 and CD-6 together. Republicans basically keeping the current map.

http://coloradopols.com/diary/15532/redistricting-dday

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Compromise map proposed by the Dems.




Appears to make both CO-06 and CO-07 more competitive.

[Gravis Marketing]

How much of CO-2 is in the Front Range south of Boulder? Is that area populated enough to make the district swingy?

[krazen1211]

How much of CO-2 is in the Front Range south of Boulder? Is that area populated enough to make the district swingy?

Given how liberal Boulder is, probably not.

This is the equivalent 'compromise' GOP map. I believe it is quite a bit closer to the current map.

Permutter's residence kind of stinks here. Adams probably belongs with Arapahoe while Douglas belongs with Jefferson. Boulder County/2nd district is obviously the problem point between the maps.

The 3rd, 5th, 1st, and 4th look very similar between both maps. The GOP is trying to cede 2 and 7 while claiming 6, while the Democrats seem to want all 3.

http://coloradopols.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=15639

[Senator Sbane]

I think that makes the 7th even more Republican than what the Democrats proposed, which was more Republican than the current district.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Yeah, sticking all of Jefferson County into the 7th while taking out Aurora would make it more Republican.

[Dgov]

Yeah, sticking all of Jefferson County into the 7th while taking out Aurora would make it more Republican.

Especially since you're putting most of Douglas county into CO-2, which means that under that map I think CO-7 is actually more Republican than CO-6.  Kind of a weird choice if you ask me.

[krazen1211]

Yeah, sticking all of Jefferson County into the 7th while taking out Aurora would make it more Republican.

Especially since you're putting most of Douglas county into CO-2, which means that under that map I think CO-7 is actually more Republican than CO-6.  Kind of a weird choice if you ask me.

Good point. I just eyeballed it, saw that it had a bunch of Adams, and wrote it off, but I guess on the GOP map the areas around Boulder are cut out.

I'm honestly surprised they don't just shore up the 4th and 7th and call it a day. On the Dem map it looks like you can draw a very small line through 4 districts right near Highlands Ranch.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Given the split in the legislature, it seems inevitable that the map will be drawn by the courts (who presumably will try to maintain the current map as much as possible, since I'm pretty sure they drew the last one), so this is really just posturing.

[Senator X]

Given the split in the legislature, it seems inevitable that the map will be drawn by the courts (who presumably will try to maintain the current map as much as possible, since I'm pretty sure they drew the last one), so this is really just posturing.

On the other hand, the Democrats control the Colorado State Supreme Court...

[jimrtex]

Given the split in the legislature, it seems inevitable that the map will be drawn by the courts (who presumably will try to maintain the current map as much as possible, since I'm pretty sure they drew the last one), so this is really just posturing.

On the other hand, the Democrats control the Colorado State Supreme Court...

Given that the Colorado Supreme court has now misinterpreted the state constitution, a court will be unlikely to step in until the last possible opportunity.  So a court won't step in until next Spring.

[A-Bob]

And so here we are in July...and we have nothing to show for redistricting

2012 congressional races are going to be a mess

[Progressive Realist]

How much of CO-2 is in the Front Range south of Boulder? Is that area populated enough to make the district swingy?

Given how liberal Boulder is, probably not.

This is the equivalent 'compromise' GOP map. I believe it is quite a bit closer to the current map.

Permutter's residence kind of stinks here. Adams probably belongs with Arapahoe while Douglas belongs with Jefferson. Boulder County/2nd district is obviously the problem point between the maps.

The 3rd, 5th, 1st, and 4th look very similar between both maps. The GOP is trying to cede 2 and 7 while claiming 6, while the Democrats seem to want all 3.

http://coloradopols.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=15639

The current 6th district has south Jefferson County (which is very Republican) grouped with Douglas County (also very Republican), but not the northern part of Jefferson, which is more marginal/trending Democratic these days.

I don't think all of Jefferson County belongs in the same district, personally.

[dpmapper]

Here's what I think makes most sense from a court/neutral perspective:




First issue is what to do with the Denver district, which must expand.  Currently the only parts outside Denver it contains are to the south, between Denver's two legs.  If the goal is geographic compactness, then it doesn't make sense to add a protrusion into Littleton, not to mention that Littleton doesn't really belong.  Given Denver's arm to the northeast, the most logical thing to do would be either to add parts of Aurora or the suburbs to the north.  Splitting Aurora probably won't make anyone happy, so I went north.  

After that, I cleaned up the boundaries between the Denver suburban districts.  There's no reason for the 7th to take in parts of all three counties (Adams, Arapahoe, Jefferson) so I limited it to the first two.  The two eastern tails of Adams and Arapahoe belong together so that's why I gave them both to the 7th.  CD-02 no longer enters ArapahoeAdams or Weld.  Instead, I gave it more of Jefferson.  It really doesn't make sense to have the western half of CD-02 be ski areas but not include Aspen, so I tossed that in CD-02 as well.  

After that the map basically draws itself.  Longmont's desire to be paired with Fort Collins is kept (for the most part) and so there are basically minimal changes needed elsewhere.  

Not counting parts attached to the Denver district, ArapahoeAdams is now in one piece (compared to two previously), Jefferson is in two pieces (three previously) and AdamsArapahoe in two (like before).  Weld County is now intact.  It's rather elegant, if I say so myself.

Democrats will not like it much, though.  Districts 3 and 4 are at 56 and 57% Republican, so they'll still be at least lean R, but District 7 is down to 50.5% Democratic.  CD-4 is currently at 57% so that's no change (it loses some plains counties but gains SW Weld, which is fairly red as well), CD-3 is up from 54.7% (it has to gain population and there's not really any non-red areas to grab if you keep the ski resorts in CD-2), CD-7 is down from 52.2% Democrat.  

NB: Colorado as a whole is 52.7% Republican, according to DRA, but voted 53.5% Obama.  So given the trends, CD-7 is probably still D+2 or 3.  

ETA: I seem to have drawn Coffman (Aurora) and Perlmutter (Golden) out of their districts.  I'm guessing a court won't care.  Surely if any Denver suburb belongs with Boulder and the mountain slopes, it's Golden...

[jimrtex]

Here's what I think makes most sense from a court/neutral perspective:

It doesn't make sense to split the mountain counties, Garfield, Grand, Chaffee.

So instead have CD-4 come down in the lower Arkansas, let CO-7 go up into Weld County which is commuter suburbs.  There is no justification for a 3-way split of Arapahoe County, so CO-1 should switch entirely to the north (and Holly Hills and Glendale decreed to be contiguous and placed in CD-7).

This makes CD-7 more of an Aurora/east metro district like it should be.

[krazen1211]

Here's what I think makes most sense from a court/neutral perspective:

Very GOP favored. And Coffman lives in Highlands Ranch now, so you can't really drawn him out of his district.

[dpmapper]

It doesn't make sense to split the mountain counties, Garfield, Grand, Chaffee.

So instead have CD-4 come down in the lower Arkansas, let CO-7 go up into Weld County which is commuter suburbs.  There is no justification for a 3-way split of Arapahoe County, so CO-1 should switch entirely to the north (and Holly Hills and Glendale decreed to be contiguous and placed in CD-7).

This makes CD-7 more of an Aurora/east metro district like it should be.

Some splits are necessary for population equality.  I could give the rest of Grand to CD-3 and give CD-2 more of Garfield to get rid of one of them, I suppose.  

For the Denver district, I just kept its current territory (which happened to be on the Arapahoe side) and then added what made most geographic sense (which happened to be on the Adams side).  Incidentally I realize now that I got these two names mixed up in my previous post. 

@krazen: I wasn't trying, honest!  

[jimrtex]

It doesn't make sense to split the mountain counties, Garfield, Grand, Chaffee.

So instead have CD-4 come down in the lower Arkansas, let CO-7 go up into Weld County which is commuter suburbs.  There is no justification for a 3-way split of Arapahoe County, so CO-1 should switch entirely to the north (and Holly Hills and Glendale decreed to be contiguous and placed in CD-7).

This makes CD-7 more of an Aurora/east metro district like it should be.

Some splits are necessary for population equality.  I could give the rest of Grand to CD-3 and give CD-2 more of Garfield to get rid of one of them, I suppose.  

For the Denver district, I just kept its current territory (which happened to be on the Arapahoe side) and then added what made most geographic sense (which happened to be on the Adams side).  Incidentally I realize now that I got these two names mixed up in my previous post. 

@krazen: I wasn't trying, honest!  

If you are going to convince a court to reduce the number of split counties, there is no reason to 3-way split Arapahoe Count, just because it already is.

[muon2]

It doesn't make sense to split the mountain counties, Garfield, Grand, Chaffee.

So instead have CD-4 come down in the lower Arkansas, let CO-7 go up into Weld County which is commuter suburbs.  There is no justification for a 3-way split of Arapahoe County, so CO-1 should switch entirely to the north (and Holly Hills and Glendale decreed to be contiguous and placed in CD-7).

This makes CD-7 more of an Aurora/east metro district like it should be.

Some splits are necessary for population equality.  I could give the rest of Grand to CD-3 and give CD-2 more of Garfield to get rid of one of them, I suppose.  

For the Denver district, I just kept its current territory (which happened to be on the Arapahoe side) and then added what made most geographic sense (which happened to be on the Adams side).  Incidentally I realize now that I got these two names mixed up in my previous post. 

@krazen: I wasn't trying, honest!  

If you are going to convince a court to reduce the number of split counties, there is no reason to 3-way split Arapahoe Count, just because it already is.

When it comes to splits for the court, I'm not sure that keeping Denver intact should have any special preference.

Consider that the four big counties Adams, Arapahoe, Denver, and Jefferson are all between 60% and 85% of a CD, so none are substantially larger all smaller than the others. Next, consider that the four counties together are just barely less than the population needed for 3 CDs - in fact at 99.67% of the total they could fall within the 0.5% limit that the court has permitted when a state makes a compelling case to have some population deviation. Otherwise a small amount of population from either Bloomfield or Douglas would make up the difference.

If the big four are to make up 3 CDs, then either one county must be split three ways, or two counties must be each split two ways. I'll assume the goal is to have no county split between more than two districts, since that appears in the GOP plan, and The Dems only show a three-way split of Jefferson for connectivity between Park and Douglas.

If Denver is intact then Arapahoe must be split, since discontiguous parts are surrounded by Denver. If Denver combines with parts of Arapahoe, the natural combination of the remainder is with Adams which becomes the other split county.

A majority HVAP district is not possible at the precinct-level, and probably not at the block level without long tendrils up and down the Front Range. However, a strong influence district is possible, and even if not required it might be a desirable goal given the large Hispanic population in the state. If one is created, Denver must be a part of it. If the Arapahoe inclusions are ignored for the purposes of counting splits, and Denver is kept intact, the best HVAP comes from a combination of Denver and parts of Adams. That would be about 30% HVAP.

So, why not recognize that Denver is no more special than the other big counties, and could be split. If Adams is kept intact, and combined with the most Hispanic areas of Denver a district with a 39% HVAP can be achieved. That would be a substantially better influence district than what could be made by keeping Denver intact. The remainder of Denver would then combine with Aurora and most of Arapahoe, leaving some southwestern parts of Arapahoe to combine with Jefferson.

[dpmapper]

Muon, the problem with that seems to be that Douglas County gets stranded in between the 3 Denver districts that you've drawn and the Colorado Springs district and has nowhere to go.  There's really no reason to draw a stark dividing line between Denver/Adams/Arapahoe/Jefferson and Douglas just because the first four happen to add up to 3 districts.