Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 23, 2014, 03:03:58 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderator: muon2)
| | |-+  US House Redistricting: Washington
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 23 Print
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: Washington  (Read 30760 times)
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13745
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #50 on: December 27, 2010, 03:52:52 pm »
Ignore

If you want to make a realistic map, I would recommend crossing at Skamania-Klickitat.
I you use Washington's numbers, the counties east of the Cascades are entitled to almost 2 of 9 districts (it is a tiny bit short which can be made by including Skamania in the east.

But with 10 representatives, it comes out to 9.2, which means 140,000 people from the East have to be added to West.  If that is not realistic, then it is because Washington's numbers are not realistic.

If you cross in the south, then you either have to split Yakima County or Benton County.   Most of the population in Yakima County is in the north, so the split ends up being in or very near the city of Yakima.  In Benton County, you could end up splitting Richland from Kennewick, and probably end up splitting one or the other cities.

Thanks for the educational lesson! It's not like I've lived in Washington my entire life, and have been thinking about a possible 10th district and how many people would have to be moved out of Yakima for the past 3 years or so...


...Klickitat County and a portion of Yakima, however, have to be in a bicascadial district. I decided to cross at the southern part of the state based on precedent---districts almost always cross here when they have to. In the 80s, a portion of Clark and all of Skamania Counties were in the fourth, in the 90s a portion of Klickitat was in the 3rd, and now a portion of Skamania is in the 4th. So, I needed about 128,200 people from Yakima County out of the fourth district. I left all of Yakima City in the fourth, however I had to put Union Gap as well as some unincorporated suburban areas to the east and west of Yakima into the third district. All of south Yakima County is in the third...

Or maybe not.


Of course, with Dave's redistricting app underestimating WA-8's population by 100,000 or so, I wouldn't concern myself with the 8th's boundaries too much.

You naively assumed that I even looked at Dave's redistricting app.

And you naively assume that the comment was solely directed at you.


If you want to make a realistic map, I would recommend crossing at Skamania-Klickitat.

Then what?  Climb over desolate Satus Pass and snag some distant population from Yakima?  Continue along the desolate Columbia and split up the Tri-Cities? 

There will be 10 Congressional Districts, you need to throw out your old way of thinking.   A lot has changed in the last 40 years.  For one, the Tri-Cities and Vancouver are both significant population centers.   And I doubt that 40 years ago a significant percent of the working population of Kittitas County commuted to King County for work. 

So why does the 15th legislative district do this? Why do we not have some sort of East King-Kittitas legislative district, or something along those lines, instead? Why does the 15th LD stretch from Clark to Yakima if it's so unrealistic?



I'm not saying your suggestion is impossible. I just don't think it is the most likely outcome.

But if I'm being stubborn by looking at Washington's legislative and congressional districts stretching back to statehood, and seeing that the East-West divide has never been bridged anywhere but the Columbia River in 121 years, then so be it.
Logged

Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: December 27, 2010, 08:43:00 pm »
Ignore


So why does the 15th legislative district do this?

Because of the need for 49 evenly populated state legislative districts.  It is nothing like your suggestion of linking distant population centers into one district.  The 15th is largely rural.



Quote
But if I'm being stubborn by looking at Washington's legislative and congressional districts stretching back to statehood, and seeing that the East-West divide has never been bridged anywhere but the Columbia River in 121 years, then so be it.

 Linking just Klickitat County in to a SW WA district makes a lot of sense, which is why they have done it in the past.  

When Washington had 7 Congressional Districts in the 70's, it could evenly put 7 of its 49 legislative districts into each congressional district.  Eastern Washington was two districts short so it took in two SW districts.   Since they were redistricting by legislative district, they did not have the flexibility we have now.  The 3rd, 4th, and 5th were geographical giants back then.  With more districts and more large population centers today, we can be more compact.

« Last Edit: December 27, 2010, 08:44:34 pm by Sounder »Logged
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8755


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: December 27, 2010, 09:23:31 pm »


...Klickitat County and a portion of Yakima, however, have to be in a bicascadial district. I decided to cross at the southern part of the state based on precedent---districts almost always cross here when they have to. In the 80s, a portion of Clark and all of Skamania Counties were in the fourth, in the 90s a portion of Klickitat was in the 3rd, and now a portion of Skamania is in the 4th. So, I needed about 128,200 people from Yakima County out of the fourth district. I left all of Yakima City in the fourth, however I had to put Union Gap as well as some unincorporated suburban areas to the east and west of Yakima into the third district. All of south Yakima County is in the third...


If you want to make a realistic map, I would recommend crossing at Skamania-Klickitat.

Then what?  Climb over desolate Satus Pass and snag some distant population from Yakima?  Continue along the desolate Columbia and split up the Tri-Cities? 

There will be 10 Congressional Districts, you need to throw out your old way of thinking.   A lot has changed in the last 40 years.  For one, the Tri-Cities and Vancouver are both significant population centers.   And I doubt that 40 years ago a significant percent of the working population of Kittitas County commuted to King County for work. 

So why does the 15th legislative district do this? Why do we not have some sort of East King-Kittitas legislative district, or something along those lines, instead? Why does the 15th LD stretch from Clark to Yakima if it's so unrealistic?



I'm not saying your suggestion is impossible. I just don't think it is the most likely outcome.

But if I'm being stubborn by looking at Washington's legislative and congressional districts stretching back to statehood, and seeing that the East-West divide has never been bridged anywhere but the Columbia River in 121 years, then so be it.

I get the historical precedent that has put all crossings along the Columbia. However, one big factor is the Redistricting Commission and the rules that govern it. Here's what I get from the SOS:

Quote
    * Districts shall have nearly equal population;
    * District lines should coincide with local political subdivisions (such as city and county lines) and “communities of interest”;
    * Districts should be convenient, contiguous (share a common land border or transportation route), and compact;
    * Districts must not favor or discriminate against one political party or group;
    * District divisions should encourage electoral competition.

Clearly both the Snoqualmie pass and Columbia River path meet the third rule. In my previous posts I was trying to gauge how the three main options would satisfy or break the second rule, and it seems that splitting Yakima or the Tri-Cities may violate that rule more than a trans-Cascade district would.

I think we should also look at the fifth rule in considering those options. If I look at the last two presidential elections then CD 4 and 5 are firmly R, while CD 1, 6, 7 and 9 are firmly D. CD's 2, 3, and 8 were the most competitive being within 5% for the 2004 race and voted for Obama with less than his statewide margin in 2008. Shifting CD 3 east to pick up a good portion of the Yakima valley would clearly make it less competitive as it would tilt more strongly R. The effect of shifting part of CD 8 over the mountains does not have to make it so uncompetitive, depending on the choice of King County suburbs that would be in the new district. CD 8 also starts with more of a D lean than CD 3 so shifting more Rs to it serves to increase competition.
 
The Commission is bound to follow the law, and following mapping history is not one of their rules. If they truly consider both preserving communities of interest and providing electoral competition, then they may be forced to use the Snoqualmie Pass option.
Logged


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.

If you missed the lunar eclipse on Oct 8, there's a partial eclipse of the Sun on Oct 23 best visible in central and western North America.
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13745
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #53 on: December 27, 2010, 09:49:19 pm »
Ignore

I also have trouble believing the Democrats on the bipartisan commission are going to allow every swing district to become significantly more Republican.

Linking just Klickitat County in to a SW WA district makes a lot of sense, which is why they have done it in the past. 

When Washington had 7 Congressional Districts in the 70's, it could evenly put 7 of its 49 legislative districts into each congressional district.  Eastern Washington was two districts short so it took in two SW districts.   Since they were redistricting by legislative district, they did not have the flexibility we have now.  The 3rd, 4th, and 5th were geographical giants back then.  With more districts and more large population centers today, we can be more compact.



I hadn't even mentioned the fact that the 4th included most of Clark in the 70s, but if you want to add to the precedence argument... Wink

Do you have a link about the strategy they used in the 70s? It sounds interesting! Maybe we should just add a 50th LD and do it again. Cheesy
« Last Edit: December 27, 2010, 10:13:00 pm by bgwah »Logged

CultureKing
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3218
United States


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: December 27, 2010, 10:17:55 pm »
Ignore

I also have trouble believing the Democrats on the bipartisan commission are going to allow every swing district to become significantly more Republican.

Linking just Klickitat County in to a SW WA district makes a lot of sense, which is why they have done it in the past. 

When Washington had 7 Congressional Districts in the 70's, it could evenly put 7 of its 49 legislative districts into each congressional district.  Eastern Washington was two districts short so it took in two SW districts.   Since they were redistricting by legislative district, they did not have the flexibility we have now.  The 3rd, 4th, and 5th were geographical giants back then.  With more districts and more large population centers today, we can be more compact.



I hadn't even mentioned the fact that the 4th included most of Clark in the 70s, but if you want to add to the precedence argument... Wink

Do you have a link about the strategy they used in the 70s? It sounds interesting! Maybe we should just add a 50th LD and do it again. Cheesy

Agreed. With the 3rd doubtlessly losing Olympia in the north it likely will not be extremely competitive to begin with in the near term. The 8th is the interesting district to me... depending upon how it is drawn it could remain a swing district or become extremely difficult for Reichert (though if Chelan and Kittitas were added then he would probably be considerably safer).
Logged

Econ: -6.50, Social: -5.23
Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: December 28, 2010, 12:12:48 am »
Ignore


Do you have a link about the strategy they used in the 70s? It sounds interesting!

I haven't been able to find an online version, but I have the legal definitions for most of our historical congressional districts.   When we had 7 districts, they simply list the legislative districts that make up each congressional district.  In previous years it was broken down by county and precinct.   I'll probably have to go over to the state library in Tumwater to get the definitions for the 70's legislative districts.
Logged
Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: December 28, 2010, 12:25:18 am »
Ignore

The 8th is the interesting district to me... depending upon how it is drawn it could remain a swing district or become extremely difficult for Reichert (though if Chelan and Kittitas were added then he would probably be considerably safer).

Chelan and Kittitas are trending blue.  The newer Wenatchee suburbs are predominately in Douglas County, while the Leavenworth, Entiat, Lake Chelan, and the Lake Wenatchee areas attract nature loving Seattle area lefties.  Klickitat has always been a swing area.

Dave "Wilderness Area" Reichert would be right at home in a district that encompasses all of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness area that he is trying to expand. 
Logged
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13745
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #57 on: December 28, 2010, 01:18:30 am »
Ignore


Do you have a link about the strategy they used in the 70s? It sounds interesting!

I haven't been able to find an online version, but I have the legal definitions for most of our historical congressional districts.   When we had 7 districts, they simply list the legislative districts that make up each congressional district.  In previous years it was broken down by county and precinct.   I'll probably have to go over to the state library in Tumwater to get the definitions for the 70's legislative districts.

Do you have any old congressional maps? I had some, but I can't find them! I think I lost the USB drive I had them on. Sad

You're definitely obligated to go get interesting stuff from the state library for us, I think. Wink Grin
Logged

Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: December 28, 2010, 01:42:02 am »
Ignore


Do you have any old congressional maps?

I'll try to post them tomorrow.  They are digital photographs of an atlas, so they are not great. 
Logged
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13745
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #59 on: December 28, 2010, 01:57:49 am »
Ignore


Do you have any old congressional maps?

I'll try to post them tomorrow.  They are digital photographs of an atlas, so they are not great.  

Yeah, I had just snapped mine with my camera, too. No problem. Smiley

Some interest things I remember:
-The 2nd used to cross the Puget Sound and included some of the Olympic peninsula
-Eastern Washington was cut horizontally between the 4th and 5th, not vertically
-1st was Seattle back in the day, IIRC
« Last Edit: December 28, 2010, 02:01:32 am by bgwah »Logged

Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: December 28, 2010, 04:41:22 am »
Ignore

The historical progression was:

- single statewide district
- two statewide districts
- three statewide districts
- After 1909 it is split into geographical districts
  • 1st - Island, King, Kitsap, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Whatcom
  • 2nd - Chehalis (Grays Harbor), Clallam, Clark, Cowlitz, Jefferson, Klickitat, Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Pierce, Skamania, Thurston, Wahkiakum
  • 3rd - All of Eastern Washington sans Klickitat
- In 1915 the state gains the 4th & 5th districts
  • 1st - city of Seattle, Kitsap
  • 2nd - remainder of King County, Clallam, Island, Jefferson, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Whatcom
  • 3rd - Chehalis (Grays Harbor), Mason, Pierce, Thurston, Pacific, Lewis, Cowlitz, Waukiakum, Clark, Skamania
  • 4th - Klickitat, Benton, Yakima, Kittitas, Whitman, Grant, Adams, Franklin, Walla Walla, Columbia, Garfield, Asotin, 
  • 5th - Ferry, Stevens, Lincoln, Spokane, Chelan, Okanogan, Pend Oreille, Douglas
- In 1933 the state gains the 6th
  • 1st - City of Seattle (which only extended north to 85th), Kitsap
  • 2nd - King County portions (areas north of 85th, Bothell, Kenmore, Woodinville, Juanita, Avondale), Snohomish, Skagit, Whatcom, Island, San Juan, Clallam, Jefferson
  • 3rd - Grays Harbor, Mason, Thurston, Pacific, Lewis, Wahkiakum, Cowlitz, Clark, Skamania
  • 4th - Klickitat, Benton, Yakima, Kittitas, Whitman, Grant, Adams, Franklin, Walla Walla, Columbia, Garfield, Asotin, 
  • 5th - Ferry, Stevens, Lincoln, Spokane, Chelan, Okanogan, Pend Oreille, Douglas
  • 6th - Pierce, portion of King County not in the 1st or 2nd (pretty much everything south of Seattle and Juanita (north Kirkland)
- In 1959 the 7th is carved out.
  • 3rd, 4th, and 5th stay the same
  • 1st - Bainbridge Island, northern Seattle, Wilburton (south Bellevue) Bellevue, Kirkland, Kenmore, Woodinville, Shoreline
  • 2nd - Clallam, Island, Jefferson, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, Whatcom, Redmond, Avondale, Duvall, Skykomish
  • 6th - Pierce, Algona, Covington, Kent, Des Moines, Fall City, North Bend, Issaquah, Newcastle,
  • 7th - Kitsap (minus Bainbridge Island), southern Seattle, Burien, SeaTac, Factoria, Skyway, Renton, Mercer Island, Cascade (Fairwood)
- In 1961 all the districts remain the same except:
  • 6th - Pierce, Kitsap (minus Bainbridge Island)
  • 7th - same areas above plus the King County areas that were in the 6th
- In 1969:
  • 1st - Bainbridge Island, Seattle north of Denny Way, Mercer, Island, Bellevue, Shoreline, Kenmore,
  • 2nd - Clallam, NE Jefferson County, Island, San Juan, Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, NE King County
  • 3rd - Western Klickitat County, Skamania, Clark, Cowlitz, Wahkiakum, Lewis, Pacific, Thurston, Grays Harbor, Mason, remainder of Jefferson County,
  • 4th - Yakima, Benton, Kittitas, Whitman, Grant, Adams, Franklin, Walla Walla, Columbia, Garfield, Asotin, remainder of Klickitat
  • 5th - Ferry, Stevens, Lincoln, Spokane, Chelan, Okanogan, Pend Oreille, Douglas
  • 6th - Kitsap (minus Bainbridge Island), Pierce, Vashon Island, King County south of S. 288th and east of 196th SE
  • 7th - remainder of King County
- In 1973 they split the districts by legislative district.  I do not have the legal descriptions of the legislative districts, but it looks like:
  • 1st - north Seattle
  • 2nd - Whatcom, San Juan, Island, Skagit, Snohomish, NE King County
  • 3rd - SE King County, Olympic Peninsula (minus Kitasp), Pierce County (minus Tacoma), SW Washington (minus south and east Clark County, and Skamania)
  • 4th - Clark County along the Columbia from Vancouver, Skamania, Okanogan County west of the Okanogan River, Grant County west to the Cascades, Benton County west to the Cascades
  • 5th - remainder of Eastern Washington
  • 6th - Tacoma and Kitsap
  • 7th - central and south Seattle
- In the 80's an 8th district was added
  • 1st - north seattle suburbs, Bainbirdge, North Kitsap
  • 2nd - NW WA and Olympic Peninsula
  • 3rd - SW WA all the way up to the Chehalis River in Grays Harbor, minus Skamania
  • 4th - Skamania, Klickitat, Benton, Franklin, Yakima, Kittitas, Grant, Okanogan, Chelan, Douglas
  • 5th remainder of Eastern Washington
  • 6th - Tacoma, west and central Pierce, remainder of Kitsap
  • 7th - Seattle
  • 8th - East and south King and Pierce
- In the 90's we pick-up the 9th and that's pretty much where we are now.
Logged
jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5811
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: December 28, 2010, 05:06:11 am »
Ignore

So why does the 15th legislative district do this? Why do we not have some sort of East King-Kittitas legislative district, or something along those lines, instead? Why does the 15th LD stretch from Clark to Yakima if it's so unrealistic?
Yakima County has to be split, since LD 14 is entirely in the county.  LD 13 takes a sliver on the northern edge.  And it is a little bit different putting part of Yakima with Skamania and Klickitat and putting it in with a booming suburban area.

But if I'm being stubborn by looking at Washington's legislative and congressional districts stretching back to statehood, and seeing that the East-West divide has never been bridged anywhere but the Columbia River in 121 years, then so be it.
Before the 1960s they would not have been that concerned about population equality.  I know in the 1960s bunches of LD's were shifted from east to west.  At the end of WWII, Clark was about the same population as Cowlitz and Lewis, and would be just another county that would get stuck on the end of the district

And transportation changes.  When Washington was part of Oregon Territory, Lewis and Clarke (sic) were the first two counties in the area.  Lewis was almost everything west of the Cascades.  It was more or less an accident that the current Lewis ended up where it did after all the other counties were sliced off.  Clarke was everything east of the Cascades but included Fort Vancouver.  It was actually a Columbia Basin district rather than Trans-Cascade.  But it was the part that kept the name, though it lost its 'e'.

There wasn't an interstate highway so that people could easily travel back and forth on a daily basis.
Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14170


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -2.61

View Profile
« Reply #62 on: December 29, 2010, 04:52:47 am »
Ignore

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

If you don't already understand this, repeat it to yourself enough times until you do...


Logged
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8755


View Profile
« Reply #63 on: December 29, 2010, 10:10:04 am »

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

If you don't already understand this, repeat it to yourself enough times until you do...


OK, I understand what you are saying, and I hear a number of WA posters assert this. So far, I have seen no justification for this other than historical precedent. Perhaps I am naively assuming that the commission will follow the law, rather than merely follow their gut. So, I am open to an argument against a non-Columbia crossing based on WA state law.

These points must be the legal basis for the map:
Quote
    * Districts shall have nearly equal population;
    * District lines should coincide with local political subdivisions (such as city and county lines) and “communities of interest”;
    * Districts should be convenient, contiguous (share a common land border or transportation route), and compact;
    * Districts must not favor or discriminate against one political party or group;
    * District divisions should encourage electoral competition.


Logged


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.

If you missed the lunar eclipse on Oct 8, there's a partial eclipse of the Sun on Oct 23 best visible in central and western North America.
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #64 on: December 29, 2010, 11:59:09 am »
Ignore

Here:
    * Districts should be convenient

It is safe to say that a district relying on Stevens Pass (ie, putting Chelan wiith the west side) could not be defended in court with a straight face.
Snoqualmie Pass is more rational, seeing as the alternatives rely on Satus Pass instead.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #65 on: December 29, 2010, 01:41:49 pm »
Ignore

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

If you don't already understand this, repeat it to yourself enough times until you do...



This isn't the 70's anymore.  We have 10 districts, and almost 7,000,000 people.   The most logical crossing is at Snoqualmie Pass.  If you don't believe me, drive it.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2010, 01:48:04 pm by Sounder »Logged
Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #66 on: December 29, 2010, 02:04:02 pm »
Ignore

Here:
    * Districts should be convenient

It is safe to say that a district relying on Stevens Pass (ie, putting Chelan wiith the west side) could not be defended in court with a straight face.
Snoqualmie Pass is more rational, seeing as the alternatives rely on Satus Pass instead.


Chelan is pretty much geographically isolated from everywhere.   Since it doesn't have 600,000 people, it is going to have to be placed in a district that is centered around a larger population center.   It's most natural linkages are north and east, but those areas are for the most part desolate.  Outside of Moses Lake, it is off to Spokane, Tri-Cities, or Yakima before you find another decent sized population center.   Most of the year from Wenatchee you can get to Issaquah faster than what it takes to get to Spokane or Kennewick. 


Logged
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13745
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #67 on: December 29, 2010, 03:43:14 pm »
Ignore

I think Meeker actually has some rationale for his stance... Maybe he should share? Smiley

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

The only time a CD will cross the Cascades is along the Columbia.

If you don't already understand this, repeat it to yourself enough times until you do...


OK, I understand what you are saying, and I hear a number of WA posters assert this. So far, I have seen no justification for this other than historical precedent. Perhaps I am naively assuming that the commission will follow the law, rather than merely follow their gut. So, I am open to an argument against a non-Columbia crossing based on WA state law.

These points must be the legal basis for the map:
Quote
   * Districts shall have nearly equal population;
    * District lines should coincide with local political subdivisions (such as city and county lines) and “communities of interest”;
    * Districts should be convenient, contiguous (share a common land border or transportation route), and compact;
    * Districts must not favor or discriminate against one political party or group;
    * District divisions should encourage electoral competition.

As I previously mentioned, I can't help but suspect all three current swing districts will be made significantly more Republican under such a plan, which would fall under the last two there.

I also think it would be a violation of communities of interest, but I suppose that is more subjective.
Logged

Meeker
meekermariner
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14170


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -2.61

View Profile
« Reply #68 on: December 29, 2010, 05:21:03 pm »
Ignore

I'm not going to go into too many details, but I'll say I've had multiple lengthy conversations with those directly involved in the process (including one of the members of the Redistricting Commission). You can value that as much as you wish.

The Commission itself isn't entirely opposed to the notion of a King/Kittitas district. The issue is local elected and community leaders - whose input is valued immensely in practice - are extremely opposed to being included in a district with Western Washington. They consider themselves Easterners and want to remain in a district with other Easterners. They don't feel they'll be represented by a district that crosses the Cascades. The political enmity between Eastern WA vs. Western WA runs high.

Unless the folks in Cle Elum decide for whatever reason they don't care anymore (breaking 120+ years of habit...) a district connected by one of the passes simply isn't going to happen. The Washington redistricting process isn't a touchy-feely, non-partisan exercise. It's a very political process that involves a lot of compromise and intangibles that no one outside of party insiders really notice.
Logged
Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #69 on: December 29, 2010, 05:32:18 pm »
Ignore



The Commission itself isn't entirely opposed to the notion of a King/Kittitas district. The issue is local elected and community leaders - whose input is valued immensely in practice - are extremely opposed to being included in a district with Western Washington. They consider themselves Easterners and want to remain in a district with other Easterners. They don't feel they'll be represented by a district that crosses the Cascades. The political enmity between Eastern WA vs. Western WA runs high.

What about the opinion of those folks in Yakima or Tri-Cities!?!    You suggest just kicking the can to an even further locale within Eastern Washington.  The reality is that 130,000 or so EWers will be in a predominantly western district.   The most logical splits, if you look at geography and the numbers, is to put Klickitat County in the 3rd and Kittitas and Chelan into a trans-Cascade district, whether it be the 8th or 10th.

A significant chunk of Kittitas County commutes to King County.   How many folks from Tri-Cities or Yakima commute to Clark County (or vice versa?).  

As someone who used to do block boundaries for the elections division, I'll try to poke around and see what the redistricting commission is thinking.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2010, 05:37:46 pm by Sounder »Logged
Sounder
Full Member
***
Posts: 102
United States


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: December 29, 2010, 06:06:50 pm »
Ignore


As I previously mentioned, I can't help but suspect all three current swing districts will be made significantly more Republican under such a plan, which would fall under the last two there.

I also think it would be a violation of communities of interest, but I suppose that is more subjective.

In the last 6 Presidential elections, Klickitat went Democrat 4 times and Kittitas went Democrat 50% of the time.   Chelan is trending blue.  Wealthy nature loving westsiders are moving to places like Leavenworth and Lake Chelan.  

Yes the 3rd will be more Republican, but that is only because it sheds the insanity surrounding The Evergreen Socialist College.   The 2nd should become more Republican too based on the trends.  It can be kept a lean Democrat district if the 8th crosses the Cascades at both Snoqualmie and Stevens, and takes in some of Eastern Snohomish County from the 2nd.
Logged
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13745
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96

View Profile
« Reply #71 on: December 29, 2010, 06:29:54 pm »
Ignore


As I previously mentioned, I can't help but suspect all three current swing districts will be made significantly more Republican under such a plan, which would fall under the last two there.

I also think it would be a violation of communities of interest, but I suppose that is more subjective.

In the last 6 Presidential elections, Klickitat went Democrat 4 times and Kittitas went Democrat 50% of the time.   Chelan is trending blue.  Wealthy nature loving westsiders are moving to places like Leavenworth and Lake Chelan.   

Yes the 3rd will be more Republican, but that is only because it sheds the insanity surrounding The Evergreen Socialist College.   The 2nd should become more Republican too based on the trends.  It can be kept a lean Democrat district if the 8th crosses the Cascades at both Snoqualmie and Stevens, and takes in some of Eastern Snohomish County from the 2nd.

The Democratic Party's fortunes in Eastern Washington decreased dramatically in the 1990s. 1988 is no longer an accurate reflection of its partisan politics. And of course Perot helped push many counties to Clinton in the 1990s. Obama won the state by 17 points, the largest Democratic victory since 1964. Yet he only won Klickitat by a small fraction of a percent. Just a 19 vote margin, overall. I consider Klickitat a lean R county.

We'll see what they do with Eastern Snohomish County. Lots of interesting possibilities.
Logged

Jbrase
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5924
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.32, S: -5.74


View Profile
« Reply #72 on: December 29, 2010, 07:29:17 pm »
Ignore

After I had already made several districts I remember Meeker being butt hurt about crossing the Cascades so I corrected myself int time to keep any districts from crossing along the Columbia river.

Logged
Meeker
meekermariner
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14170


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -2.61

View Profile
« Reply #73 on: December 29, 2010, 08:31:25 pm »
Ignore

Butt hurt? What does that even mean?

Anyways, your obsession with me is getting kind of weird, dude. You've got some issues to work out.
Logged
jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5811
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #74 on: December 30, 2010, 01:43:12 am »
Ignore

Here:
    * Districts should be convenient

It is safe to say that a district relying on Stevens Pass (ie, putting Chelan wiith the west side) could not be defended in court with a straight face.
Snoqualmie Pass is more rational, seeing as the alternatives rely on Satus Pass instead.
We're going to put Chelan and Kittitas with a King County district.  Depending on how the population works out we take a bit of Douglas as well.

Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 23 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines