Weighted Voting For Congress
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:41:07 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Weighted Voting For Congress
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7
Author Topic: Weighted Voting For Congress  (Read 20799 times)
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #100 on: July 23, 2014, 06:20:19 PM »

Your map shows Calvert and St. Mary's as part of Potomac, but your numbers appear to include St.Mary's in Chesapeake.   I would place Calvert in Chesapeake, and St.Mary's in Potomac.

Potomac 3175K
Chesapeake 3201K


My map was correct and I caught the numeric error after my post. I corrected them for my upcoming v2, along with the addition of DC to Potomac.

Potomac 3263K
Chesapeake 3112K

Calvert is part of the DC metro even if it's too rural to be in the UCC. I see no good reason to shift it to Balto.
Are they Baltimore and Washington, or Chesapeake and Potomac?

Every other county in the western district includes the Potomac River.   Every other county that Borders Chesapeake Bay is part of the eastern district.

If we were using commuting patterns Ann Arundel and Howard would be part of the Washington MSA.

I relied on the Census assignments which puts those two counties in the Baltimore MSA (Feb 2013). That in turn puts the two counties in the Baltimore UCC.

A name that is representative of a district need not apply explicitly to every county in a district. It is meant to be suggestive of the district as a whole and in comparison to other districts in the state.
Howard and Ann Arundel are central counties of the Baltimore MSA.  Because they were in the Baltimore MSA in 1990, they were included in the Baltimore urbanized area, and the census bureau simply found a convenient location near the county line to chop the urbanized areas.  It is a circular definition.  Howard is in the Baltimore MSA because Howard in in the Baltimore MSA.

Calvert County is oriented toward the Chesapeake, with the largest town Chesapeake Beach.  It has the oldest state marine research facility on the east coast.  Chesapeake Bay is the defining feature of Maryland.  Baltimore is a large city because it is located at the head of Chesapeake Bay.  It it a not so large city, since the Susquehanna goes north.

Washington was deliberately located on the Potomac because it was the state line, and close to the home of George Washington.  The Potomac river is an important secondary feature of Maryland, and the concentration of population is tied to it.


I appreciate the history, but we spent some time, and you in particular helped develop the UCC metric. We understood during that process that there are changes and mergers that might well be desired over the last couple of decades, but the Census is stuck. Nonetheless, the UCC model can stand up as a neutral division and seems to be worth using, particularly where one goal is to take a neutral approach to CoIs. So is it really worth ignoring it for one small county?
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #101 on: July 23, 2014, 08:24:08 PM »

Howard and Ann Arundel are central counties of the Baltimore MSA.  Because they were in the Baltimore MSA in 1990, they were included in the Baltimore urbanized area, and the census bureau simply found a convenient location near the county line to chop the urbanized areas.  It is a circular definition.  Howard is in the Baltimore MSA because Howard in in the Baltimore MSA.

Calvert County is oriented toward the Chesapeake, with the largest town Chesapeake Beach.  It has the oldest state marine research facility on the east coast.  Chesapeake Bay is the defining feature of Maryland.  Baltimore is a large city because it is located at the head of Chesapeake Bay.  It it a not so large city, since the Susquehanna goes north.

Washington was deliberately located on the Potomac because it was the state line, and close to the home of George Washington.  The Potomac river is an important secondary feature of Maryland, and the concentration of population is tied to it.


I appreciate the history, but we spent some time, and you in particular helped develop the UCC metric. We understood during that process that there are changes and mergers that might well be desired over the last couple of decades, but the Census is stuck. Nonetheless, the UCC model can stand up as a neutral division and seems to be worth using, particularly where one goal is to take a neutral approach to CoIs. So is it really worth ignoring it for one small county?
Inclusion of rural counties in MSA is often artificial.  It just means that people can own a small chunk of land, have a few cattle, a place to ride ATVs, perhaps what is seen as a better environment for their children, if they are willing to commute a long distance to work.  A neighboring county that actually has stronger ties with the metropolis may be excluded because its small town may provide some local jobs.  Mille Lacs is part of the Twin Cities MSA for goodness sakes.

That is why they were excluded from UCC.  I recognized, even if you did not, that these peripheral counties would be included/excluded from districts solely based on population needs and proximity to the actual urban core.  If the UCC is short a whole number of districts, the smaller adjacent counties will get tacked on.  If the UCC is close to a whole number of districts, they are excluded.

But since Calvert is not in a UCC because of its remoteness, and its population concentration on the eastern, bayside, of the county.  I am willing to bet the sensibilities of the residents is that they are part of the Chesapeake Bay community, even if they work for the federal government.  They may have chosen their home because it is so unlike the madness of the capital.

I am willing to let the residents of St Mary's, Calvert, Anne Arundel, and Howard decide for themselves.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #102 on: July 23, 2014, 08:45:56 PM »
« Edited: July 23, 2014, 11:01:46 PM by jimrtex »

Here's my draft of the plan for all 100 districts.

MA (2)
   MA-Bay 4925K
   MA-Berkshire 1623K

Massachusetts 2909K
Boston 3639K

Alternative names:

The Bay State;
Berkshires, Connecticut Valley, Worcester, Cape Cod, and the Islands;
Trans-I-495;

Cis-I-495;

History

Massachusetts, which included Maine had three districts, with one allocated to Maine.  When Maine achieved statehood in 1820, Massachusetts kept the two districts which it had previously.
A 3rd district was added in 1860.  It lost the 3rd district in 1970, when it ranked 10th, its lowest ranking ever.  It dropped out of the top 10 in 1980, and in 2010 was 14th.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #103 on: July 23, 2014, 08:58:28 PM »

I would just go with Western Massachusetts, Cape Cod and the Islands. Worcester County is part of (indeed, is) Central rather than Western Massachusetts, technically, but when there are only two options it's often lumped in with the West insofar as it's economically and culturally dominated by a city that isn't Boston, one of Boston's suburbs or exurbs, or on or near the seacoast.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #104 on: July 23, 2014, 10:51:15 PM »

Here's version 2 of my draft plan. In addition to the population I have included the PVI of each district in square brackets, with positive values for D PVIs and negative numbers for R PVIs.



Pacific (16)
AK (1) 2916K [-12.0]
CA (10)
   Shasta (CA) 3368K [-0.0]
   San Pablo Bay (CA) 3845K [+21.5]
   Santa Cruz (CA) 4038K [+22.9]
   San Joaquin (CA) 4129K [-2.5]
   San Emigdio (CA) 3552K [-2.3]
   San Gabriel (CA) 3991K [+14.1]
   Los Angeles (CA) 3793K [+23.6]
   Santa Ana (CA) 3010K [-5.1]
   San Bernardino (CA) 4258K [-0.7]
   Palomar (CA) 3270K [+2.0]
HI (1) 1360K [+19.5]
OR (1) 3831K [+4.5]
WA (2)
   Puget (WA) 4103K [+11.1]
   Columbia (WA) 2621K [-4.5]

Rocky Mountains (7)
CO (2)
   Red Rocks (CO) 2490K [+5.3]
   Front Range (CO) 2540K [-3.6]
ID (1) 1568K [-17.5]
MT (1) 989K [-7.0]
NV (1) 2701K [+2.1]
UT (1) 2764K [-22.4]
WY (1) 564K [-21.7]

Southwest (10)
AZ (2)
   Gila and Rim (AZ) 2575K [-5.9]
   Maricopa (AZ) 3817K [-8.2]
NM (1) 2059K [+3.7]
TX (7)
   Alamo (TX) 3875K [-2.0]
   Rio Grande (TX) 3468K [+5.1]
   Permian Basin (TX) 2901K [-26.2]
   Fort Worth (TX) 3080K [-15.6]
   Dallas (TX) 3616K [-4.9]
   Piney Woods (TX) 4114K [-20.1]
   Houston (TX) 4092K [-2.4]

Great Plains (10)
IA (1) 3046K [+1.1]
KS (1) 2853K [-12.2]
MN (2)
   St Anthony (MN) 3063K [+4.6]
   Itasca (MN) 2241K [-2.4]
MO (2)
   Prairie (MO) 3725K [+1.1]
   Ozarks (MO) 2264K [-17.1]
NE (1) 1826K [-12.2]
ND (1) 673K [-10.1]
OK (1) 3751K [-19.0]
SD (1) 814K [-9.6]

Great Lakes (14)
IL (4)
   Chicago (IL) 2696K [+32.9]
   Cook (IL) 2499K [+13.2]
   Fox and Kankakee (IL) 3505K [+0.9]
   Lincoln (IL) 4131K [-4.0]
IN (2)
   Lake Michigan (IN) 2450K [-3.3]
   Hoosier (IN) 4034K [-6.3]
MI (3)
   Mackinac (MI) 3400K [-4.2]
   Huron (MI) 2620K [+3.6]
   St Clair (MI) 3864K [+10.6]
OH (3)
   Miami (OH) 4187K [-6.7]
   Scioto (OH) 3255K [-2.8]
   Erie (OH) 4095K [+6.4]
WI (2)
   Winebago (WI) 3221K [-0.4]
   Dells (WI) 2466K [+6.2]

Delta South (7)
AL (1) 4780K [-13.9]
AR (1) 2916K [-14.0]
KY (1) 4339K [-12.7]
LA (1) 4533K [-11.9]
MS (1) 2967K [-9.0]
TN (2)
   Great Valley (TN) 2342K [-20.6]
   Cumberland and Mississippi (TN) 4004K [-11.8]

Atlantic South (14)
FL (5)
   Appalachicola (FL) 3326K [-11.8]
   Tampa Bay (FL) 3527K [-2.1]
   Cape Canaveral (FL) 3831K [-3.0]
   Okeechobee (FL) 3800K [-3.0]
   Everglades (FL) 4318K [+10.3]
GA (3)
   GA-Kennesaw (GA) 4253K [-18.8]
   GA-King (GA) 2393K [+15.7]
   GA-Ocmulgee (GA) 3041K [-7.1]
NC (3)
   Catawba (NC) 3369K [-7.1]
   Piedmont (NC) 3522K [-0.4]
   Pamlico (NC) 2644K [-2.3]
SC (1) 4625K [-9.6]
VA (2)
   Shenandoah (VA) 4045K [-0.4]
   James (VA) 3956K [-0.1]

Mid Atlantic (16)
DE (1) 898K [+8.2]
MD&DC (2)
   Potomac (MD) 3263K [+21.8]
   Chesapeake (MD) 3112K [-4.3]
NJ (3)
   Palisades (NJ) 4240K [+9.4]
   Jersey Shore (NJ) 2340K [-1.6]
   Delaware (NJ) 2212K [+6.7]
NY (5)
   Long Island (NY) 2833K [+0.4]
   Brooklyn (NY) 4735K [+26.9]
   Manhattan (NY) 3440K [+29.5]
   Hudson (NY) 3579K [+4.3]
   Ontario (NY) 4791K [+1.4]
PA (4)
   Allegheny (PA) 4455K [-1.2]
   Upper Susquehanna (PA) 3299K [-7.1]
   Lower Susquehanna (PA) 1526K [-7.3]
   Schuykill (PA) 3423K [+14.6]
WV (1) 1853K [-13.0]

New England (7)
CT (1) 3574K [+7.2]
ME (1) 1328K [+5.5]
MA (2)
   Bay (MA) 3134K [+10.3]
   Cape and Berkshire (MA) 2414K [+8.6]
NH (1) 1316K [+1.0]
RI (1) 1053K [+11.3]
VT (1) 626K [+15.7]
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #105 on: July 23, 2014, 10:51:47 PM »

I would just go with Western Massachusetts, Cape Cod and the Islands. Worcester County is part of (indeed, is) Central rather than Western Massachusetts, technically, but when there are only two options it's often lumped in with the West insofar as it's economically and culturally dominated by a city that isn't Boston, one of Boston's suburbs or exurbs, or on or near the seacoast.
In cases where one district contains most of the area of a state, and the other districts can be denoted as representing a specific area of the state, I have also been permitting:

(1) The name of the state.
(2) The official nickname of the state.
(3) What is on the license plates.

In this case, I left off the license plates, since I doubt that anyone from other than Massachusetts and New Hampshire would associate the slogan with Massachusetts (in the case of NH, it is because it is on Grandpa's car when he comes up to visit).  Everyone else would think it was some sort of dealer plate advertising the auto make.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #106 on: July 24, 2014, 07:48:59 AM »

This is the detail for southern LA county in my map above. The San Gabriel district groups whole Census county subdivisions. The remaining subdivisions are split between LA city and the San Emigdio district.

Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #107 on: July 24, 2014, 04:49:21 PM »
« Edited: July 24, 2014, 04:51:12 PM by traininthedistance »

Here's version 2 of my draft plan. In addition to the population I have included the PVI of each district in square brackets, with positive values for D PVIs and negative numbers for R PVIs.



Looks quite nice.

I guess my remaining quibbles would be:

1) I prefer jimrtex's Florida; crossing the Everglades like you do in the Fort Lauderdale-Naples district seems like a poor idea, and I like that he keeps Miami-Dade mostly by itself (obviously Monroe is stuck behind it) on VRA grounds.
2) Virginia still rankles.  Whatever problems one has in splitting Roanoke from the Shenandoahs pales in comparison to the silliness that is mashing the southwest and NoVA together.
3) What I said about PA, though that is much more minor than the issues with FL and VA.

FTR I agree with your rationale in putting Calvert with the DC district rather than the Baltimore one.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #108 on: July 24, 2014, 07:32:14 PM »


I guess my remaining quibbles would be:

1) I prefer jimrtex's Florida; crossing the Everglades like you do in the Fort Lauderdale-Naples district seems like a poor idea, and I like that he keeps Miami-Dade mostly by itself (obviously Monroe is stuck behind it) on VRA grounds.
2) Virginia still rankles.  Whatever problems one has in splitting Roanoke from the Shenandoahs pales in comparison to the silliness that is mashing the southwest and NoVA together.
3) What I said about PA, though that is much more minor than the issues with FL and VA.

FTR I agree with your rationale in putting Calvert with the DC district rather than the Baltimore one.

I looked at VA, and the shift you suggest puts the James district 330K over the population limit. That's 1.43 of the quota and given the updated guidance I dont think the variance can be justified. SW VA is its own CoI, so I can't argue persuasively that it must go east instead of north. However, I fully understand the political concern you raise.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #109 on: July 24, 2014, 09:17:54 PM »


I guess my remaining quibbles would be:

1) I prefer jimrtex's Florida; crossing the Everglades like you do in the Fort Lauderdale-Naples district seems like a poor idea, and I like that he keeps Miami-Dade mostly by itself (obviously Monroe is stuck behind it) on VRA grounds.
2) Virginia still rankles.  Whatever problems one has in splitting Roanoke from the Shenandoahs pales in comparison to the silliness that is mashing the southwest and NoVA together.
3) What I said about PA, though that is much more minor than the issues with FL and VA.

FTR I agree with your rationale in putting Calvert with the DC district rather than the Baltimore one.

I have two problems with jimrtex's FL map. First is that it lops Hernando county off of the Tampa district, even though it is in the UCC. Putting it back puts the district over the population limit by about 60 K, even if all the inland counties are removed. The second issue is that if the VRA or something like that is used for Miami, then there is no justification to put Monroe with it. Disconnected districts would apply here just as in MA. Of course Monroe would best fit with Collier geographically, but that would add further to the Tampa overpopulation. That leaves it going with the east side counties.

Does the Hispanic CoI in Miami-Dade justify overpopulation of the Tampa district?
Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #110 on: July 24, 2014, 09:57:11 PM »

Of course Monroe would best fit with Collier geographically, but that would add further to the Tampa overpopulation. That leaves it going with the east side counties.

Does the Hispanic CoI in Miami-Dade justify overpopulation of the Tampa district?

Does it?  Monroe really only has road connections to Miami-Dade; the border with Collier is unpopulated Everglades.

I suspect that I'd prefer an overpopulated Tampa district (or chopping off Hernando) in this case, not just because of the Hispanic CoI but also because of the dichotomy in FL between the Gulf and Atlantic coasts.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #111 on: July 25, 2014, 06:33:34 AM »

Of course Monroe would best fit with Collier geographically, but that would add further to the Tampa overpopulation. That leaves it going with the east side counties.

Does the Hispanic CoI in Miami-Dade justify overpopulation of the Tampa district?

Does it?  Monroe really only has road connections to Miami-Dade; the border with Collier is unpopulated Everglades.

I suspect that I'd prefer an overpopulated Tampa district (or chopping off Hernando) in this case, not just because of the Hispanic CoI but also because of the dichotomy in FL between the Gulf and Atlantic casts.

There is year round ferry service from Key West to Ft Meyers which counts as a connection. Even without that the guidelines permit disconnected counties in a district when it serves a CoI. In my map Cape Cod is disconnected from the rest of MA, but that's OK.

If avoiding a cross FL district is the goal, then I would make the extra appeal to the VRA and isolate M-D. Then use those factors to justify the overpopulation of the Tampa Bay dist including Monroe. Then the inland counties can go with Polk to Cape Canaveral, with others to the Okeechobee district on the Atlantic side. 
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #112 on: July 26, 2014, 06:49:34 AM »

Of course Monroe would best fit with Collier geographically, but that would add further to the Tampa overpopulation. That leaves it going with the east side counties.

Does the Hispanic CoI in Miami-Dade justify overpopulation of the Tampa district?

Does it?  Monroe really only has road connections to Miami-Dade; the border with Collier is unpopulated Everglades.

I suspect that I'd prefer an overpopulated Tampa district (or chopping off Hernando) in this case, not just because of the Hispanic CoI but also because of the dichotomy in FL between the Gulf and Atlantic casts.

There is year round ferry service from Key West to Ft Meyers which counts as a connection. Even without that the guidelines permit disconnected counties in a district when it serves a CoI. In my map Cape Cod is disconnected from the rest of MA, but that's OK.

If avoiding a cross FL district is the goal, then I would make the extra appeal to the VRA and isolate M-D. Then use those factors to justify the overpopulation of the Tampa Bay dist including Monroe. Then the inland counties can go with Polk to Cape Canaveral, with others to the Okeechobee district on the Atlantic side. 

This is what I think such a FL plan would look like. Miami-Dade is kept separate based on its unique Hispanic CoI (66.4% HVAP). The Tampa Bay district is overpopulated by 130K, but that is due to the constraint of Miami-Dade, avoiding a cross-peninsula district, and keeping the Tampa UCC intact in one district. Is this a sufficient justification for the overpopulation?



Appalachicola, 3799K, O'08 42.0%
Tampa Bay, 4658K, O'08 49.7%
Cape Canaveral, 4125K, O'08 50.7%
Okeechobee, 3421K, O'08 61.8%
Miami-Dade, 2497K, O'08 58.1%
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #113 on: July 26, 2014, 09:32:35 PM »


I guess my remaining quibbles would be:

1) I prefer jimrtex's Florida; crossing the Everglades like you do in the Fort Lauderdale-Naples district seems like a poor idea, and I like that he keeps Miami-Dade mostly by itself (obviously Monroe is stuck behind it) on VRA grounds.
2) Virginia still rankles.  Whatever problems one has in splitting Roanoke from the Shenandoahs pales in comparison to the silliness that is mashing the southwest and NoVA together.
3) What I said about PA, though that is much more minor than the issues with FL and VA.

FTR I agree with your rationale in putting Calvert with the DC district rather than the Baltimore one.

I have two problems with jimrtex's FL map. First is that it lops Hernando county off of the Tampa district, even though it is in the UCC. Putting it back puts the district over the population limit by about 60 K, even if all the inland counties are removed. The second issue is that if the VRA or something like that is used for Miami, then there is no justification to put Monroe with it. Disconnected districts would apply here just as in MA. Of course Monroe would best fit with Collier geographically, but that would add further to the Tampa overpopulation. That leaves it going with the east side counties.

Does the Hispanic CoI in Miami-Dade justify overpopulation of the Tampa district?
Putting Hernando in Tampa Bay, and shifting DeSoto and Hardee to Southeast puts Tampa Bay at 1.35 of the national average.  I'd go for either an exception or splitting Hernando off.  Hernando is somewhat a case of chain inclusion with Pasco ending up as a central county, and some commuting from Hernando into Pasco.

Monroe has nothing to do with the VRA.  Key West is quite remote from anywhere.  You can fly from a number of Florida cities.  I might choose Fort Myers because it is closer to Houston.  If you weren't flying from a major airline hub, you might choose to fly via Fort Lauderdale.   But then you might seriously consider renting a car.

The ferry from Fort Myers to Key West does not run on Tuesday and Wednesday, is passenger only, and takes 3-1/2 hours sailing (+1/2 hour pre-boarding), and sails once a day.

As Train notes, there is nobody living on the mainland (actually there are 20 persons, 4 less than the 24 in the Dry Tortugas.   And large parts of the Monroe population do not live in Key West, with about half the population from Marathon landward.  Key Largo is 60 miles from Miami and 100 miles from Key West.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #114 on: July 26, 2014, 10:17:53 PM »

This shows the urban areas in southern Florida.



There is hardly anyone inland south of Tampa.

Note that commuting from Polk County is dominate to the east: 19K to Orange, 8K to Osceola, 12K to Hillsborough, 1K to Lake, 1K to Highlands).   The inverse is not true.  Commuting to Polk County: Hillsborough 10K, Orange 2K, Osceola 2K, Lake 1K, Highlands 1K.

Internal commuting within Polk County is 192K, so clearly it is independent of Orlando and Tampa.  Whether someone identifies with Tampa or Orlando may depend on whether they live in Lakeland or Winter Haven, or whether they are a hockey fan or a basketball fan.

There is not a strong case for inclusion with Tampa or Orlando, so my decision is based on keeping the west coast within population limits, which may also justify chopping off the extreme north end of the Spring Hill to Naples conurbation.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #115 on: July 26, 2014, 11:20:05 PM »

So I think I can stipulate the following:

Avoiding the cross-peninsula district and preserving the Tampa UCC would justify a district at 1.35 of the quota, but no more.

Polk is sufficiently independent of both Tampa and Orlando that there is no compelling reason to place it with either.

The Hispanic CoI does not require a stand-alone district for Miami.

The revised guidelines suggest that some consideration be given to population equality, so why not keep M-D with Broward, and place Polk and the other inland counties in the Okeechobee district. The result reduces the difference in population between the largest and smallest districts.



Appalachicola, 3467K, O'08 41.8%
Tampa Bay, 4586K, O'08 49.7%
Cape Canaveral, 3693K, O'08 51.0%
Okeechobee, 2738K, O'08 54.1%
Everglades, 4317K, O'08 62.1%
Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #116 on: July 26, 2014, 11:54:16 PM »

So I think I can stipulate the following:

Avoiding the cross-peninsula district and preserving the Tampa UCC would justify a district at 1.35 of the quota, but no more.

Polk is sufficiently independent of both Tampa and Orlando that there is no compelling reason to place it with either.

The Hispanic CoI does not require a stand-alone district for Miami.

The revised guidelines suggest that some consideration be given to population equality, so why not keep M-D with Broward, and place Polk and the other inland counties in the Okeechobee district. The result reduces the difference in population between the largest and smallest districts.



Appalachicola, 3467K, O'08 41.8%
Tampa Bay, 4586K, O'08 49.7%
Cape Canaveral, 3693K, O'08 51.0%
Okeechobee, 2738K, O'08 54.1%
Everglades, 4317K, O'08 62.1%

What are the Hispanic #s on the Everglades district?  I assume it's plurality but not majority?
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #117 on: July 27, 2014, 12:20:31 AM »

So I think I can stipulate the following:

Avoiding the cross-peninsula district and preserving the Tampa UCC would justify a district at 1.35 of the quota, but no more.

Polk is sufficiently independent of both Tampa and Orlando that there is no compelling reason to place it with either.

The Hispanic CoI does not require a stand-alone district for Miami.

The revised guidelines suggest that some consideration be given to population equality, so why not keep M-D with Broward, and place Polk and the other inland counties in the Okeechobee district. The result reduces the difference in population between the largest and smallest districts.



Appalachicola, 3467K, O'08 41.8%
Tampa Bay, 4586K, O'08 49.7%
Cape Canaveral, 3693K, O'08 51.0%
Okeechobee, 2738K, O'08 54.1%
Everglades, 4317K, O'08 62.1%
There is not that much difference in equality.  I think Polk should be with either the Tampa or the Orlando district, unless totally impossible.  If there were 6 districts, I think the 6th would have to go on the Gulf Coast, and the Sarasota to Naples district might have to pull in Polk.

I didn't switch Marion for population reasons.  Marion has some commuting to Lake and Sumter, but also some to Alachua, but a large share stays in the county.  There might be some sense of community with University of Florida, at least the football team.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #118 on: July 27, 2014, 08:38:39 AM »

So I think I can stipulate the following:

Avoiding the cross-peninsula district and preserving the Tampa UCC would justify a district at 1.35 of the quota, but no more.

Polk is sufficiently independent of both Tampa and Orlando that there is no compelling reason to place it with either.

The Hispanic CoI does not require a stand-alone district for Miami.

The revised guidelines suggest that some consideration be given to population equality, so why not keep M-D with Broward, and place Polk and the other inland counties in the Okeechobee district. The result reduces the difference in population between the largest and smallest districts.



Appalachicola, 3467K, O'08 41.8%
Tampa Bay, 4586K, O'08 49.7%
Cape Canaveral, 3693K, O'08 51.0%
Okeechobee, 2738K, O'08 54.1%
Everglades, 4317K, O'08 62.1%

What are the Hispanic #s on the Everglades district?  I assume it's plurality but not majority?

HVAP 48.5%, WVAP 29.2%, BVAP 18.7%, so it's still strongly majority minority, but with the older Cubans voting R, there probably isn't bloc voting.

There is not that much difference in equality.  I think Polk should be with either the Tampa or the Orlando district, unless totally impossible.  If there were 6 districts, I think the 6th would have to go on the Gulf Coast, and the Sarasota to Naples district might have to pull in Polk.

I didn't switch Marion for population reasons.  Marion has some commuting to Lake and Sumter, but also some to Alachua, but a large share stays in the county.  There might be some sense of community with University of Florida, at least the football team.

This puts Polk in an unusual position. It is sufficiently independent of both Tampa and Orlando, that it need not go with either, yet your position is that it should go with one of those two. It seems that rationally it's either independent or it isn't. If it is independent then the guideline suggesting that there be some attention to population equality takes hold. I used the same logic for Marion.

This seems to put Polk in a pseudo-independent status. There's a larger sense of FL regions - north, central, and south, and Polk is not on the border, but definitely in the central region with Tampa and Orlando. A meta-guideline seems to be that one should not take core counties out of their region.

But then I have the following conundrum. Lee county is definitely not in the central region, yet there is a higher priority on placing it with Tampa which is central then keeping it in the south. So the anti-crossing desire trumps the regionalism there, but not when it comes to Polk.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #119 on: July 28, 2014, 04:09:20 PM »

So I think I can stipulate the following:

Avoiding the cross-peninsula district and preserving the Tampa UCC would justify a district at 1.35 of the quota, but no more.

Polk is sufficiently independent of both Tampa and Orlando that there is no compelling reason to place it with either.

The Hispanic CoI does not require a stand-alone district for Miami.

The revised guidelines suggest that some consideration be given to population equality, so why not keep M-D with Broward, and place Polk and the other inland counties in the Okeechobee district. The result reduces the difference in population between the largest and smallest districts.



Appalachicola, 3467K, O'08 41.8%
Tampa Bay, 4586K, O'08 49.7%
Cape Canaveral, 3693K, O'08 51.0%
Okeechobee, 2738K, O'08 54.1%
Everglades, 4317K, O'08 62.1%

What are the Hispanic #s on the Everglades district?  I assume it's plurality but not majority?

HVAP 48.5%, WVAP 29.2%, BVAP 18.7%, so it's still strongly majority minority, but with the older Cubans voting R, there probably isn't bloc voting.

There is not that much difference in equality.  I think Polk should be with either the Tampa or the Orlando district, unless totally impossible.  If there were 6 districts, I think the 6th would have to go on the Gulf Coast, and the Sarasota to Naples district might have to pull in Polk.

I didn't switch Marion for population reasons.  Marion has some commuting to Lake and Sumter, but also some to Alachua, but a large share stays in the county.  There might be some sense of community with University of Florida, at least the football team.

This puts Polk in an unusual position. It is sufficiently independent of both Tampa and Orlando, that it need not go with either, yet your position is that it should go with one of those two. It seems that rationally it's either independent or it isn't. If it is independent then the guideline suggesting that there be some attention to population equality takes hold. I used the same logic for Marion.

This seems to put Polk in a pseudo-independent status. There's a larger sense of FL regions - north, central, and south, and Polk is not on the border, but definitely in the central region with Tampa and Orlando. A meta-guideline seems to be that one should not take core counties out of their region.

But then I have the following conundrum. Lee county is definitely not in the central region, yet there is a higher priority on placing it with Tampa which is central then keeping it in the south. So the anti-crossing desire trumps the regionalism there, but not when it comes to Polk.
I think the regions are:

North (Pensacola to Jacksonville, coming south to pick up population and areas that don't have a high level of in-migration).

Gulf Coast (traditionally anchored in Tampa, but expanding southward and northward).  Note the University of South Florida is in Tampa.  The further you are from Tampa, the more independent.

Atlantic Coast (anchored in Miami, but expanding northward along the coast).  The further you are from Miami, the more independent.

Central Florida (interior beginning roughly around Tampa).  A combination of Orlando, and retirement areas .   Retirees don't need jobs, so you can build up large areas without job centers, with jobs for those providing services (contractors, grocery stores, golf course) and with little need for mass transit.  So you can have counties with relatively large population without being suburbs.  Notable about the central region is that it is where population does cross the peninsula.  Below that, there is an area with quite low population.

Interior South (largely agricultural, and in or too close to the Everglades for conversion to retirement centers).

Eastern Hillsborough is beginning the transition to Central Florida.   What I mean about Polk is that you can't say that it has to be with Tampa, or it has to be with Orlando, in the same sense that Pasco or Osceola have to those cities.  But because of its location will generally be placed with one or the other, except in a case of extreme necessity.  As I noted, the next district likely will be placed on the west coast, and will likely need to pick up additional population, which would include Polk and Hernando.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #120 on: July 28, 2014, 06:55:38 PM »
« Edited: July 28, 2014, 08:49:33 PM by muon2 »

Digging around FL resources that identified regions, I find that eight seem to describe the state. Population-wise the whole state is 5.54 of the quota, so the ideal district would be 1.11 of a quota, and could help justify a district slightly over 1.33.

The SE region covers Indian River to Monroe, and has population 1.83 times the quota. If it constitutes two districts alone the other three districts would have to average 1.24 of the quota. That gets difficult with the 1.33 limit.

The Tampa Bay region either consists of the core MSA (Hernando, Hillsborough, Pasco, Pinellas) or an extended region that includes Citrus, Polk, Manatee and Sarasota. The core region is 0.82 of the quota and the full region is 1.25 of the quota.

The SW region has a core of Charlotte, Collier and Lee which makes up only 0.32 of the quota. Sometimes the region is expanded north to Manatee and Sarasota and inland to DeSoto, Glades, and Hendry.

The South Central region has the six interior counties south of Polk and makes up 0.07 of the quota.

The Central region has a core of the CSA of Orlando/Daytona Beach/The Villages plus Brevard county with a population of 0.99 of the quota. Marion county is frequently in this region and brings the full region to 1.09 of the quota.

The remaining three regions are in North FL. Northwest is the Panhandle east through Jefferson county. Northeast is the Jacksonville CSA. North Central is the remaining area in between. It makes up 0.98 of the quota. If Marion is shifted north is rises to 1.08 of the quota, and with Marion and Citrus it goes to 1.12 of the quota.

The simplest grouping of the regions is to take the three northern regions together as a district for 0.98 of the quota. The full Tampa and Central regions each form a district with 1.25 and 1.09 of the quota respectively. That leaves adding the core SW and S Central districts to the Southeast bringing it to 2.22 of the quota. That then can be split between the southern three counties of the SE (1.27) and the rest of the combined South FL (0.95) to put all within quota limits.

It provides one clearly north FL district, two clearly central FL districts, and two for south FL. No district exceeds the upper limit of 1.33. It does go across the peninsula, but only for the Fort Myers area, so it avoids linking Sarasota to Palm Beach.



Appalachicola, 3326K, O'08 41.8%
Tampa Bay, 4229K, O'08 50.7%
Cape Canaveral, 3693K, O'08 51.0%
Okeechobee, 3236K, O'08 51.6%
Everglades, 4317K, O'08 62.1%
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #121 on: July 28, 2014, 10:41:28 PM »

Quite frankly, any district south of Gainesville and north of Homestead that borders both coasts is a travesty that Floridians would not countenance.  SWFL belongs with Tampa.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #122 on: July 29, 2014, 07:22:57 AM »
« Edited: July 29, 2014, 08:50:17 AM by muon2 »

Quite frankly, any district south of Gainesville and north of Homestead that borders both coasts is a travesty that Floridians would not countenance.  SWFL belongs with Tampa.

The problem is that without the SW the rest of S FL is only 1/3 of the state's population. That would be great for 6 districts, but with only 5 a small S FL forces the northern three districts to be overpopulated. If SW FL goes with central FL, then something else has to go with the south, either Polk or Brevard. There are mathematical ways to avoid that, but they involve pushing all the northern districts to the upper limits of population.

In addition, deep SW FL may not go with the Miami metro, but I couldn't find any sources from FL that say it's part of Tampa Bay either. That line seems to go south at most to Sarasota. SW only counts there if you consider the whole Gulf Coast, but that ignores the more traditional north-central-south splits of FL.

That brings up one other southern combination. It is somewhat inspired by the FL 25th CD that links parts of M-D to inland Collier. Here it links M-D with all of SW, and has better population than the SW-Palm Beach link. This Everglades district also better preserves the Hispanic CoI with a majority of the population (50.3%) and near voting age majority (49.7% HVAP).



Appalachicola, 3326K, O'08 41.8%
Tampa Bay, 4390K, O'08 50.4%
Cape Canaveral, 3693K, O'08 51.0%
Okeechobee, 3722K, O'08 61.8%
Everglades, 3669K, O'08 52.7%
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #123 on: July 29, 2014, 12:20:25 PM »

Here's version 2 of my draft plan. In addition to the population I have included the PVI of each district in square brackets, with positive values for D PVIs and negative numbers for R PVIs.

MI (3)
   Mackinac (MI) 3400K [-4.2]
   Huron (MI) 2620K [+3.6]
   St Clair (MI) 3864K [+10.6]

I have it:

Michigan 3300K
Eastern Michigan 2720
Detroit 3864

You may have displaced the population from Lenawee.

Alternative Names

Michigan
The Great Lakes State
Great Lakes
Peninsulas
Yuper-Looper
Mackinac
Michilimackinac

Eastern Michigan
Thumb

Detroit

Alternatives

I would let Jackson and Hillsdale switch districts.  While this does drop the population for Eastern Michigan and make the border more irregular, I think that there may be a Jackson-Battle Creek-Kalamazoo linkage.

History

Michigan gained its second representative in 1860, and its 3rd in 1890.  Initially it barely held onto the 3rd, but with the development of auto industry easily maintained its 3rd, and gained a 4th in 1950.  It lost the 4th in 1990.

Michigan was the 7th largest state from 1920 to 1970, and has been 7th, 8th, or 9th, since 1880, passing Kentucky, Indiana, Missouri, and Massachusetts during the past 130 years, while falling behind California, Texas, and Florida.  But Michigan will likely fall to 10th in 2020 as Georgia and North Carolina surpass it.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #124 on: July 29, 2014, 05:27:47 PM »

Here's version 2 of my draft plan. In addition to the population I have included the PVI of each district in square brackets, with positive values for D PVIs and negative numbers for R PVIs.

MI (3)
   Mackinac (MI) 3400K [-4.2]
   Huron (MI) 2620K [+3.6]
   St Clair (MI) 3864K [+10.6]

I have it:

Michigan 3300K
Eastern Michigan 2720
Detroit 3864

You may have displaced the population from Lenawee.

Alternative Names

Michigan
The Great Lakes State
Great Lakes
Peninsulas
Yuper-Looper
Mackinac
Michilimackinac

Eastern Michigan
Thumb

Detroit

Alternatives

I would let Jackson and Hillsdale switch districts.  While this does drop the population for Eastern Michigan and make the border more irregular, I think that there may be a Jackson-Battle Creek-Kalamazoo linkage.

History

Michigan gained its second representative in 1860, and its 3rd in 1890.  Initially it barely held onto the 3rd, but with the development of auto industry easily maintained its 3rd, and gained a 4th in 1950.  It lost the 4th in 1990.

Michigan was the 7th largest state from 1920 to 1970, and has been 7th, 8th, or 9th, since 1880, passing Kentucky, Indiana, Missouri, and Massachusetts during the past 130 years, while falling behind California, Texas, and Florida.  But Michigan will likely fall to 10th in 2020 as Georgia and North Carolina surpass it.

Thanks for the catch. I'll update my PVIs as well.

Jackson is sometimes placed with SE MI and sometimes in a greater Lansing/Mid Michigan region, but I've never seen it thought of as part of an extended Battle Creek/Kzoo area. Hillsdale is less glued than Jackson, but seems more likely to stay with Jackson than not. Looking at Mid Michigan, it's clear that Gratiot and Isabella (with Central MI U) should shift to go with Lansing and the Tri-Cities.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.137 seconds with 13 queries.