US House Redistricting: Arizona

[minionofmidas]

Yes. Yes, it would be more useful. But I'm too lazy to go dig for the best map of the grid I can find, then enter it manually into the DRA, when I'm then going to change it all right after that. (Oh, and did you read through the (publically available part of the) 2001 commission's deliberations? Mad kudos in that case. Or did you just make that up on the spot?) Old AZ-1 wasn't forced to move anywhere at all by population changes, of course. It's just barely above target and only "wants" to lose some new exurbs in Pinal. Though I understand that because of the Commission's rules it's drawn anew from spot, leading to more change than if the Commission were working from the old map.

[minionofmidas]

So... with immense caveatting and as only one option etc pp...







The numbering scheme right now is sort of wild here, (small) part grid, (some) part previous district, (mostly) just random. It's obviously going to be vaguely grid-based in actuality (5 of the 8 2000 districts bear the number of the closest draft map district, though 1-3 were changed.)

1 - the northeastern district. Once you got Safford to Sedona (which goes where Flagstaff goes. As a matter of course. County line be damned.) together, you of course need to pick up some areas with more quasi-suburban (but not actually suburban) patterns. Cochise got added here and rural Pinal excised mostly because I was trying to see what the Tucson-to-Pinal district might end up like, and it forces that. The far north of Mojave is FLDS Polygamists and Indians and belongs (belonged in 2000 too, really.) I didn't want to split the Prescott Valley, and that's what forced the split of "real" Mojave (Kingman and Bullhead included, Lake Havasu not). Seligman is of course onI40 between Flagstaff and Kingman and not in any way accessible from Prescott, hence that further split of Yavapai in the north.
53.6-45.0 McCain, 56.6-17.9 White, 21.1 Native. Over 60% White on VAP though. Vague lean R partly because the Dem coalition is hard to hold together - as was true of the old district. Exchanging the remainder of Yavapai for Cochise (so, redrawing the Tucson seat, Pinal, etc pp) and Bullhead City brings McCain up to 55.2, btw. Of course, if the commission'd be doing that it'd move Kingman out as well and add some rural Pinal, bringing your McCain figure down again to about 54.1. That then is almost like the minimum change alignment (other than Hopi and FLDS stuff.)

2 - the part-Phoenix metro seat. There must be one. And there will be exactly one. Unless they do funny keep-districts-alike stuff for Grijalva. As they shouldn't. Sun City and points west (including some Hispanic suburbs around Goodyear, getting drowned out in this district though), Prescott, La Paz, Lake Havasu City.
61.5-37.2 McCain, 71.7-20.3 White

3 - is the grid's number for the Yuma seat. Still with Tucson Hispanics and all the Indians it can find, but now without actual Phoenix suburbs. Except one precinct (Tonopah) that isn't even Hispanic. Just noticed that right now. It does include Green Valley and the fast-growing posh R suburb of Maricopa (in Pinal county) for compactness reasons.
55.4-43.5 Obama, 56.1-33.4 Hispanic, 4.7 Native. 50.2% Hispanic on VAP.

4 - South Phoenix Hispanics. Includes Tolleson and Avondale, but nothing in Glendale.
66.5-32.3 Obama, 65.1-20.2 Hispanic, 8.8 Black. Some people might consider this packing, obviously, but mostly only people trying to construct a gerry for White Dems.

5 - Glendale, Peoria, NW Phoenix.
58.6-40.2 McCain, 62.1-26.4 White. We're getting to the parts of the state I care diddly swat about. I understand I should observe municipal lines (which is why, of the major cities, only Phoenix is split. Though that is split four ways if we're counting the suburbs south of South Mountain.) and that it is a radial city and one should therefore avoid the temptation of creating a north central Phoenix / South Glendale seat and a northern Maricopa seat like the plague. Unless one were trying to draw a no-stops-pulled Dem gerry. Which is pointless. But that's about it.

6 - Uh, why is this number 6? Was that from the grid? Tucson and (southern) Pinal. Ugly line is due to precinct design and population balancing. Though the actual map needs to adhere to census tracts, not precincts.
50.3-48.5 McCain, 67.1-23.3 White
I'd prefer to get Florence and Coolidge in as well but it's 40,000+ people. Wreaks havoc to this surprisingly clean Maricopa map. And would drop the 3rd below 50% Hispanic. (Without excising anything in exchange, adding the area raises the McCain share to 50.5 btw.)

7 - Scottsdale, NE Phoenix.
55.6-43.3 McCain, 76.3-15.3 White. Yawn.

8 - Mesa, Tempe that bit south of South Mountain. Those two indian reservations thrown in for balance. I'd prefer if I hadn't had to do this, it smacks a tiniest bit of gerrymandering given that's it's a marginal seat.
54.7-43.9 McCain, 65.0-23.2 White
 
9 - Gilbert, Chandler, continuously built up parts in Pinal (Apache Junction, Queen Creek. You'll notice this got done between the grid and the draft last time around, too.) And a southern extension to Florence and Coolidge that makes the Maricopa map work.
59.1-39.9 McCain, 68.1-19.4 White.

I apologize if I messed up the municipal boundaries, btw. It's possible in some weird areas.

[Torie]

That thing that you drew is what you think the commission will draw or should draw if it is to best to comport with the law in your opinion, Lewis?  Really?

I see that you found a way to excise Prescott btw.

[minionofmidas]

No - see caveats - but it is beyond reasonable doubt closer than the bizarre thing you drew for all points outside the Phoenix metro. Oh, and Cochise. Because I'm not actually sure I'm buying that one yet. Though it does make some sense (unlike your map).
It's not a high standard. Your map couldn't possibly get any grade better than an F.

[Torie]

No - see caveats - but it is beyond reasonable doubt closer than the bizarre thing you drew for all points outside the Phoenix metro. Oh, and Cochise. Because I'm not actually sure I'm buying that one yet. Though it does make some sense (unlike your map).
It's not a high standard. Your map couldn't possibly get any grade better than an F.

Why don't you draw your best effort as to what does comport best with the law, or what you think the Commission will draw, and then I can grade your map.

After you do that, I will then draw another map that deals more appropriately IMO with your Maricopa phobia, which may -or may not - interest the Commission. We shall see.

Oh, I give what is apparently not your best effort an F too. We're harsh graders! 

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

Here are the maps that were discussed during Monday's meeting. Again, these are simply modifications to the grid map designed to draw two Hispanic-majority districts. They are far from being the finished product.

I apologize for the low quality, but the quality of the source video leaves something to be desired. Still, at least Arizona gives us an opportunity to observe the process.

First, a statewide view:



And here's a close up of the Maricopa County area:



The map is color coded to Hispanic percentage; the darker green a precinct is, the more Hispanic it is.

[Torie]

Thanks Vazdul. I just fixed their map where it should be fixed per that drawing. Minor stuff really. So now we shall see just how much they modify it. If Lewis were the swing vote on the Commission, it would be thrown in the trash, and they would start over. The more clockwise you turn the outside of Maricopa wheel, the more Dem it gets. Lewis twisted the dial hard in that direction. 

[krazen1211]

Looks good thus far. Compared to the grid:

1. Obama 49+. McCain 49
2. Obama 50 McCain 49
3. McCain 59, Obama 40


The changes look to be favorable to the R's thus far with 2 districts moving in our favor. Even Lewis's map gives the R's a somewhat favorable situation in Maricopa

[Torie]

OK, if the sun, the moon, and the universe itself revolve around the great AZ north, which must be cleansed of any Phoenix area taint, or we all go to hell, here is version two for Lewis to give me another "F" on (we may be trading "F's" for some time ).

It has an f'ing logic to it. I followed the f'ing roads, and know that Payson is a summer resort for LDS types trying to get out of the heat from Phoenix, and so on. I also knew Lewis would trash me if I dared separate one freaking native American from their precious homeland (except the Hopi of course in this beyond the looking glass world), so thus the shove of the "Great Red North CD" down to the border of that county that Lewis wants so bad (Graham and its LDS haven Safford), but can't have.  No he can't. Who knew that the Dems' great plot was to bag little old Graham in the Great Red North CD, but it is. Look for every argument they make to be geared towards the great clockwise twist. In this version, I accommodated their avaricious designs, but just enough to tease them - not enough for them to get what they want. I enjoy keeping them frustrated that way, yes I do.

Oh by the way, the La Paz thing was done (the "thing" being to excise it from Great Red North CD and dump it into AZ-08), because that is the only way to avoid bifurcating Prescott, which the Commission will hate. Little old Prescott has a lot of people!  

Oh yes, it's a drag to work out another color scheme when I change a map around. This time that took me about 25 minutes to get it to look a way that pleased me. I'm fussy!  Lewis probably hates my color scheme too. Good!  







By the way, that rounded northern line of AZ-05 is the Mongollon Rim. It is a quite spectacular feature from the air (it's a cliff that goes for 200 miles or more with the plateau on its north side, and the lower lands on its south side). Look for it next time your fly to LA from Dallas or some such place. You will fly right over it.

[krazen1211]

Very much like that map, Torie. It's quite like my map in post #69 and better adheres to the grid.

[Torie]

Very much like that map, Torie. It's quite like my map in post #69 and better adheres to the grid.

I thought my other map better adhered to the grid. Whatever!  Thanks.

And yes in looking back at your map, I see that yours is similar.  Well done sir!

[minionofmidas]

Looks good thus far. Compared to the grid:

1. Obama 49+. McCain 49
2. Obama 50 McCain 49
3. McCain 59, Obama 40


The changes look to be favorable to the R's thus far with 2 districts moving in our favor. Even Lewis's map gives the R's a somewhat favorable situation in Maricopa

Well duh. That's how it should be. (You could gerrymander Maricopa for the Dems, but I don't see why one should do that given there's no point.)


Torie? D. In other words, far from optimal and probably not close to the end result, but fathomable.
Lots of obvious issues still, mostly with the blue district.


Vazdul - interesting. Are we to take it that that's their idea of what the southern Hispanic district should look like? Ie, that they'll keep it Tucson-to-West End? Interesting detail about getting Eloy in, most of the reason why I didn't was the precinct design wasn't kind to me.
That does look as if they'll eventually excise Tucson from that Chandler-Pinal district. Which of course would probably mean the old 8th probably remains much as is, though perhaps not. I can certainly see why Torie - and a certain R member of the Commission - is fascinated with the alternative.


I had a macchiavellian idea about the south this morning, but I see that's not the way it's headed. Which is probably a good thing. The idea was that you could, starting from the grid, have worked in the direction of a Nogales-to-Glendale Hispanic seat that doesn't actually touch Tucson proper, a Dem Tucson-and-points north seat, and a Rep Tucson-Cochise-and-points north seat. That would kinda satisfy the interests of both Dems and Reps on this peculiarly Sonoran commission (except that Grijalva would have been clean drawn out of his district.)

[minionofmidas]

Right, so all they did so far is redraw the 3rd to be over 50% VAP Hispanic, and that left a bit of Tucson in the (2nd, was it?) from the grid.

[minionofmidas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Drew that map just for the heck of it.



Blue district does include Drexel Heights. Its Hispanic VAP proportion (50.6) is actually higher than its Obama share (50.0). Lol, I feel like I'm in Texas.
Some parts of the remainder come well together... not all though.

[minionofmidas]

AZ-07 was majority VAP Hispanic before, and was drawn in 2001 by the Commission that way overriding all other criteria to conform to the VRA, or what they thought was the VRA.  That is going to happen again.

Incorrect, by the way. As in, they drew it to not be majority VAP Hispanic back then despite (I think) being able to. They drew it to be barely majority Hispanic on total population.

[Torie]

Lewis I guess we are a mutual disadmiration society here. Your map splits the native American community, which was an issue with the Commission 10 years ago (yes, I have started to read the transcripts since you have made so many claims about what their motives were last time, mostly to try to find out what caused them to depart from the grid), that blue district is just a grab bag of Santa Cruz, Phoenix and Yuma, so we have the unnecessary grab bag troika again, and you trash the grid it seems, just like last time. So F again, although this version of yours is not quite the excrescence your last one was, as it wandered up into the Prescott area and beyond, separating that zone from the rest of the northern CD. Sorry. I just don't think you are drawing the CD's the way the Commission is likely to, but rather the way you want to do it that is not patently illegal - maybe.

It would also be more helpful if you would explain just why you think my second map sucks, as opposed to just saying that it does. That is just so Sam Spadian. Whatever.

By the way, per the American Almanac, the old AZ-07 CD pre the 2010 census was 54.6% Hispanic population, so if it wasn't 50% Hispanic VAP, it was close. The VAP thing emerged from the courts post 2001.


Addendum: Oh I see you did not split the native American community, so I retract that. So that is OK, but you do really ignore county lines don't you?  But that part isn't bad, and does match the grid pretty well. However, it makes it tougher to make AZ-02 50% Hispanic VAP without doing the number on AZ-02 that you did, because AZ-02 has to suck up more precincts in Tuscon that are less than 30% Hispanic, or make more of a hash there. In any event, the Dems are going to hate a 50% Hispanic VAP CD that is only 50% Obama. The Hispanics will freak. That is not going to happen. The yellow and blue seats don't make any sense to me however.

Anyway, per my retraction about the native Americans, I give your map a D now. And maybe doing a partial punch up into the St. John's area so that AZ-04 can take the rest of Yavapai, makes some sense, although I don't really see it as better, just different. The cut by AZ-08 into that county is just some empty rural precincts (just 4,900 residents are excised from Yavapai), not splitting up anything really. That would not be the case as much with a partial punch up into Apache County. In fact I see now that it would bifurcate St. Johns. Not good. To get rid of that would mean AZ-04 would have to punch into rural Maricopa to pick up about 4,000 residents - an option, but not perfect.

Addendum 2: I think they drew AZ-02 in the revision in haste just to meet the VAP requirement, looking at a map of Hispanic precincts that their advisors gave them, grabbing big green areas without many people, splitting county lines that are not necessary to split. It was just a way to tread water for the time being. To me, since it is not necessary to punch into Pinal, I doubt if that punch will survive.

Anyway, here is the map of the tweaks per what I said above. It works quite well actually (particularly after I noticed that I have two native American precincts in AZ-05 in Gila County by accident, that no doubt Lewis knew, but had no intention of telling me just because).  It does make AZ-01 look more erose however.

[krazen1211]

I had a macchiavellian idea about the south this morning, but I see that's not the way it's headed. Which is probably a good thing. The idea was that you could, starting from the grid, have worked in the direction of a Nogales-to-Glendale Hispanic seat that doesn't actually touch Tucson proper, a Dem Tucson-and-points north seat, and a Rep Tucson-Cochise-and-points north seat. That would kinda satisfy the interests of both Dems and Reps on this peculiarly Sonoran commission (except that Grijalva would have been clean drawn out of his district.)

Such a Hispanic district looks like it would be Republican leaning or at least tossup.

Edit: I should read down, you already drew it. Hehe.

In anycase, Torie, the 2001 map's CD-7 is 54.6% Hispanic now. But it was only about 50.x% Hispanic when drawn.



A couple updates that I've read:

1. Border communities (ie Tucson) want 3 congressmen along the border ala the grid map. Not happening, nor does the population support it.

2. Pinal County Republicans want to be with Gila County and not Pima County. Expected.

[minionofmidas]

By the way, per the American Almanac, the old AZ-07 CD pre the 2010 census was 54.6% Hispanic population, so if it wasn't 50% Hispanic VAP, it was close. The VAP thing emerged from the courts post 2001.

It was 50.6% total population, 44.5% VAP as drawn in 2000. The share had risen to over 50% VAP by 2010. Maybe your Almanac has census estimates from somewhere near the end of the decade?
Yeah, if the VAP thing only fully emerged from the courts post 2001, that would help explain it. Anyways, it's so easy to draw two over 50% VAP seats without really cherry picking precincts (while still almost impossible to draw three) that I agree 100% that they will do it. Just pointing it out is all.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well they have equal ranking to municipalities and features of geography in the law... so yeah, they can basically be safely ignored in many places of the state. Not all of course.

You're talking about the second map, right? It was just an exercise to see if a semireasoble map on that premise could be done, really. I did have the southeastern seat also include Winslow and the Apache rez initially, changed that later because it made for nicer splits in Maricopa.

So there's still no current map of "my map".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Presumably, yeah. Basically, they redrew the southwest seat to make it majority Hispanic, and haven't even started on taking communities of interest (and municipal and county boundaries etc) into account. So it will change further.
Probably relevant that they took the grid's Southwest Corner district, not the Tucson-Pinal district, as the starting point.

What's wrong with your map? Why, have you ever looked at your blue district? Starting with the minor issues - it has half of both large Apache rezzes; that'll really need to go of course. I can sort of see where you're coming from with Payson though I doubt anybody in Payson can (but hey, it's not impossible that they'll be told to suck it, what with it being inherited from the grid) but Globe has no business being in that district. Wherever rural Pinal goes, wherever Safford goes, the northern district are all much better options, though who knows.
 And of course you can't actually get from Scottsdale to Apache Junction except through Tempe and Mesa. You'll probably have to exchange it for Tempe (or rethink Maricopa entirely).
Oh, you also still have Gila River split.

Oh, and yeah, Torie, I mildly disapprove of that you don't just keep the standard color scheme. If you did, I'd just refer to your districts by their official numbers.

[minionofmidas]

Edit: I should read down, you already drew it. Hehe.

When I described it, I figured it'd work out without Drexel Heights. That'd probably make it a bit more Republican. But you can't without really cherrypicking your Phoenix precincts (both in which precincts go into the two Hispanic seats, and in the line between them to get them balanced). So i figured, ef it. I'm not going to that much work to create such an ugly fantasy map. The yellow district there is too much of a "Hispanic influence" district as is, anyways.
I also played with the notion of extending it to Bisbee and Douglas, but I never drew anything like that in the map.

[Torie]

I change the color scheme to enhance the contrast so it makes it easier to see the CD's. When the lines move around,, sometimes two colors touch that should not. Yes, I noticed the two Apache precincts and fixed the map. That was a slip up. I knew about it and then forgot it. Globe can't go into AZ-01 without putting more pressure - too much probably - on the Hispanic VAP for AZ-02.  It could go into AZ-03 assuming it being "rural" trumps county lines. Whatever, it makes no difference really. Whatever makes the Commission happy.  

Payson is a weekend place for LDS types from Phoenix, and has a nice paved road right into the Phoenix metro area. Punching up from the Phoenix metro area, the two areas with the most ties are Payson and Prescott. The Commission mentioned that about Prescott 10 years ago. It is equally true with Payson these days. (It wasn't when I was a kid and there was only a dirt road to Payson, but then Payson had maybe 100 people as well.)

Good thought about Apache Junction. AZ-03 could take all of Gila (particularly with the two native American precincts gone that makes a lot of sense, and take in Apache Junction. It does make things difficult for the metro area split between AZ-06, 03 and 05, and that will take some work. That won't happen for a few days.

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

Vazdul - interesting. Are we to take it that that's their idea of what the southern Hispanic district should look like? Ie, that they'll keep it Tucson-to-West End? Interesting detail about getting Eloy in, most of the reason why I didn't was the precinct design wasn't kind to me.
That does look as if they'll eventually excise Tucson from that Chandler-Pinal district. Which of course would probably mean the old 8th probably remains much as is, though perhaps not. I can certainly see why Torie - and a certain R member of the Commission - is fascinated with the alternative.

Well, they're bound to make some changes. The mapping consultants referred to Nogales, Tucson, and Yuma as the three concentrations of Hispanics that make a Hispanic-majority district in that area possible (that's almost verbatim), so it's pretty much a given that the district will end up including all three. However, they also talked about cleaning up the lines between that district and the one that replaces the current 8th, should they decide to proceed with the modified map. They also discussed the idea of three border districts, but pretty much dismissed it outright, saying it would be very difficult if not impossible to do while conforming to the VRA. They also said a potential issue with the map was with the northeastern district not being compact enough.

[Torie]

It just keeps getting better all the time.  







Or this actually, since Apache Junction is in Pinal.

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

The commission held a meeting today in which they discussed possible changes to the grid maps. I have pictures.

The first map was drawn to accommodate a Colorado River District in the western part of the state. It also has two Hispanic-majority districts. This early draft has several issues; most notably it does not respect tribal boundaries and it splits Flagstaff.


This is a close up of Yuma. Darker red indicates a higher Hispanic percentage.


This is a close up of Maricopa County. Darker green indicates a higher total population.


This is the map from Monday's meeting that has been further altered so as not to split Native American reservations. Testimony before the commission seems to indicate that the Hopi and Navajo are agreeable to being in the same district.

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

Because I was distracted, I missed much of the discussion on legislative maps, but I'm under the impression that two separate maps were drawn to conform to the VRA. Here is the first.


This is the same map, color coded to show which districts are Hispanic-majority (the darker green ones). The northeast district is majority Native American.


This is a close up of Maricopa County, using the same color scheme as the previous picture. Some of the districts which do not have an outright Hispanic majority are coalition districts.


This is a close up of Maricopa County on the second map (I missed the statewide view, unfortunately).


This is a comparison between the two legislative maps. Red boundaries are from the second map, green boundaries from the first. Brown boundaries are the same in both plans.

[krazen1211]

Arizona sues to overturn Section 5.

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/arizona/article_3be614ce-cf53-11e0-bbb0-001cc4c03286.html