FL: Rereredistricting

[jimrtex]

The Florida legislature is in the process of redrawing the state senate map, and are accepting public input. One of the maps was automatically drawn, and the algorithm is described here:

Autoredistricting

This is the map

Autoredistricted senate map (PDF)

The map might not be legal. The Florida Constitution forbids drawing a map with the intent of favoring or disfavoring a political party. Since an explicit constraint is partisan equity, this could be regarded as acting favorably toward a party.

It also ignores county and city boundaries and doesn't create or preserve the opportunity to elect for minority groups.

But it is an interesting approach.

The panhandle looks strange. It looks like there is a water only connection to Pensacola. I note they have an unusual definition of contiguity which makes it not absolute so that it can be optimized, perhaps that led to the connection.

I also agree that the software is not compliant with the FL constitutional provisions.

There is actually a land connections with a highway along it. There is a very narrow barrier peninsula, and then another larger peninsula that sticks out into Pensacola Bay. This is large enough to have a high school complete with stadium and baseball field. There is a bridge from the mainland to the peninsula, and then another bridge to the barrier peninsula. Both peninsula's have a road connection at their eastern ends.

I think that it may be his compactness measure having an effect. His measure of compactness is the ratio of the perimeter squared to area. He then takes the reciprocal of the average of the district reciprocals (Harmonic mean?).

Florida has census blocks out to the three-mile limit, and the outer edge is going to be very smooth, and you get the bonus of a 3-mile-wide strip of water to beef up the area. The use of the harmonic mean may tend to discount a few non-compact districts.

The inner boundary does have a few jumps back and forth. My understanding is that genetic algorithm can be tuned for other criteria. Scoring for county integrity should be possible. It might be possible to recognize minority cracking and packing if you can identify the goldilocks zone.

[jimrtex]

I switched the regions to the east and south of Tampa Bay, and redid the minority district in Hillsborough.

Before: Hillsborough, Polk, and Highlands; Manatee, Sarasota, Charlotte, Hardee, and DeSoto.
Now: Hillsborough, Manatee, and Sarasota; Polk, Highlands, Hardee, DeSoto, and Charlotte.





The switch permits creation of a district entirely in Polk, which gives my map the maximum number of whole districts in larger counties, and only one excess fragment due to the Miami-Dade/Monroe district (in addition to the Miami-Dade/Broward district.

The somewhat irregular boundary keeps Winter Haven in the north, and Mulberry, Bartow, and Dundee in the south. Winter Haven has particularly irregular boundaries.

It would really help in Florida to have some pre-redistricting organization of counties. If you are trying to build using cities, you get really ugly boundaries with lots of holes, and then you have to go back in and build by VTDs, and then use the city again to make sure the VTD's didn't intrude on another city. The district builder and/or Silverlight seems to have problems with complex geometries with holes, as the holes get filled. You also get slivers between city limits. It appears that some city limits are partially within canals, but don't meet at the center of canal, leaving a narrow strip between cities.

You could have a hierarchy of: County, County Areas, and Neighborhoods.

A county area would be an incorporated city, plus adjacent unincorporated areas, or larger unincorporated areas, which might be similar to CDPs, or rural areas. It would provide 100% coverage of the county, similar to towns in the Northeast and Midwest.

A neighborhood would be an area within a county area.

County areas and neighborhoods would serve not only as building blocks for congressional and legislative districts, but for county commissioner districts and city council districts.

I think that Census geography is released in about December of the '0 year, so that would provide time to build block equivalencies between county areas and neighborhoods.

The minority district in Hillsborough went from:

27.5% BVAP, 20.4% HVAP, 46.8% AngloVAP, 4.0% AsianVAP, 1.3% OtherVAP.

to

24.2% BVAP, 31.8% HVAP, 36.2% AngloVAP, 2.7% Asian VAP, 1.1% OtherVAP.

BVAP is is non-Hispanic Black (Black and other races).
AngloVAP is non-Hispanic (White only).

I was targetting non-Anglo areas, so dropped the Anglo percentage quite a bit. This should make it a performing coalition district. I don't know if this can compete with the cross-bay black opportunity district as far as constitutionality. The area may be evolving into a situation where preserving a black opportunity district is at the expense of Hispanic voters.

[jimrtex]

Have you submitted your plan?

It has been published - HPUBS0205

Public Plans

The link "Letter From Coalition Plaintiffs" is actually my comments. They are at the bottom of the the PDF file below the map in the comment form.

Should I have answered "If you are submitting a map, was the map drawn solely by you?" differently?
I drew the map myself, but the regions were suggested by Muon2. If he hadn't done that, I would not have drawn a map.

The kmz file can be dragged into Google Earth (Pro). It also can be opened in MyDistrictBuilder.

I couldn't really understand the compactness scoring. Shouldn't numbers such as perimeter be squared, before comparing to an area? Or maybe they are?

It has a few more city splits than I expected.

Fanning Springs and Flagler Beach are on county lines in different districts (Fanning Springs is on the Gilchrest/Levy line; Flagler Beach is on the Flagler/Volusia line.

Jacksonville has more than a district population. One district is entirely in Jacksonville.

Orlando and Tampa were split because they have odd shapes, and for racial reasons.

Palm Bay was split to make one district in Brevard County. Another map had a district of Indian River plus part of Brevard. If I used that map and my regions, the connection between the remnant of Brevard and Osceola would be very tenuous. I think if I am going to argue for a wider deviation to accommodate county boundaries, that I need to dogmatically stick to optimal county splits.

The other 14 city splits are likely mistakes. Six of them have zero population in one of the districts. I did cut across a tiny part of Miami to maintain contiguity. I could probably change the split a bit to reduce the displaced population (458 currently).

The report shows several unassigned blocks. I apparently messed up and crossed into Bradford, and may have messed up the Dixie split. I had deliberately unassigned the Dry Tortugas, since they are separate from Key West. But it appears you are expected to have one discontinuity in the map.

[muon2]

Can you file an amended map that corrects the errors? What is the deadline?

I completely agree about the subdivision of counties. It was a feature I used in the VA redistricting exercise last year.

It would really help in Florida to have some pre-redistricting organization of counties. If you are trying to build using cities, you get really ugly boundaries with lots of holes, and then you have to go back in and build by VTDs, and then use the city again to make sure the VTD's didn't intrude on another city. The district builder and/or Silverlight seems to have problems with complex geometries with holes, as the holes get filled. You also get slivers between city limits. It appears that some city limits are partially within canals, but don't meet at the center of canal, leaving a narrow strip between cities.

You could have a hierarchy of: County, County Areas, and Neighborhoods.

A county area would be an incorporated city, plus adjacent unincorporated areas, or larger unincorporated areas, which might be similar to CDPs, or rural areas. It would provide 100% coverage of the county, similar to towns in the Northeast and Midwest.

A neighborhood would be an area within a county area.

County areas and neighborhoods would serve not only as building blocks for congressional and legislative districts, but for county commissioner districts and city council districts.

I think that Census geography is released in about December of the '0 year, so that would provide time to build block equivalencies between county areas and neighborhoods.

[jimrtex]

Can you file an amended map that corrects the errors? What is the deadline?

I completely agree about the subdivision of counties. It was a feature I used in the VA redistricting exercise last year.

I have adjusted my map. I can get the city splits down to:

(1) Jacksonsville. Too large for a district.

(2,3) Tampa and Orlando. Large cities with irregular boundaries and racial concerns.

(4) Palm Bay. To keep one district entirely in Brevard Count.

(5,6) Flagler Beach and Fanning Springs. Divided on county line.

(7) Miami Jai Alai Peninsula chopped to use unincorporated population on either side in a different district. Zero population in chopped area.

(8-14) Ocoee, North Lauderdale, Weston, Cooper City, Davie, Fort Lauderdale, Pembroke Pines. Boundary irregularities that must be split to maintain contiguity. There are 11 stranded persons, 2 in Ocoee, and 9 in North Lauderdale.

I don't know of a specific deadline, but I think the special session is scheduled to close on the 6th. Since my plan is a comment, I doubt there really is a deadline, since it is unlikely to be considered. I'll go ahead and submit it.

I see where my plan was also added on the Senate redistricting web site.

Senate - Senate Plans

Click on "Submitted Plans", the default search shows senate maps, and you should see mine. There is an interactive district viewer which has a lot of features, including a racial ramp, and cities.

[jimrtex]

The coalition plaintiffs have submitted a plan that they said creates a Black opportunity district entirely within Hillsborough County. So I decided to compare:



The green district is mine, the blue district is theirs, with the green district on top. The portion of the green district to the west and south of the black line is in my district. The visible blue portion is in their district, but not mine.

The major difference is that I have the arm off to the northwest, intended to pick up Hispanic population, vs. their map shifting to the east, to pick up areas that have a black presence, but certainly not predominant.

My district: 29.28% BVAP, 31.77% HVAP
Theirs: 29.17% BVAP, 23.35% HVAP.

[muon2]

The coalition plaintiffs have submitted a plan that they said creates a Black opportunity district entirely within Hillsborough County. So I decided to compare:



The green district is mine, the blue district is theirs, with the green district on top. The portion of the green district to the west and south of the black line is in my district. The visible blue portion is in their district, but not mine.

The major difference is that I have the arm off to the northwest, intended to pick up Hispanic population, vs. their map shifting to the east, to pick up areas that have a black presence, but certainly not predominant.

My district: 29.28% BVAP, 31.77% HVAP
Theirs: 29.17% BVAP, 23.35% HVAP.

The plaintiff's district is more compact, but yours provides a better opportunity with both higher BVAP and HVAP. How do city chops compare?

[jimrtex]

The coalition plaintiffs have submitted a plan that they said creates a Black opportunity district entirely within Hillsborough County. So I decided to compare:



The green district is mine, the blue district is theirs, with the green district on top. The portion of the green district to the west and south of the black line is in my district. The visible blue portion is in their district, but not mine.

The major difference is that I have the arm off to the northwest, intended to pick up Hispanic population, vs. their map shifting to the east, to pick up areas that have a black presence, but certainly not predominant.

My district: 29.28% BVAP, 31.77% HVAP
Theirs: 29.17% BVAP, 23.35% HVAP.

The plaintiff's district is more compact, but yours provides a better opportunity with both higher BVAP and HVAP. How do city chops compare?

Hillsborough only has three cities.

Tampa is long and skinny from the Interbay Peninsula north-northeastward to the county line. I may get a little more of it with my western extension.

Temple Terrace is a small city in the notch of the northeast shoulder of the district on my map, and is included in the Coalition map. I had included it in my first map.

Plant City is in the far eastern part of the county almost to Lakeland. My district that wraps around the minority senate district goes south since it would be too much population if you took Plant City and the surrounding area. As a result, Plant City is in my district that now goes into Manatee. In my original map, Plant City was in the same district as Lakeland.

In the Coalition map, the outer district goes out to Plant City and then follows its northern city limits. This probably makes the Manatee-Hillsborough district score more compactly since it is further south.

The redistricting provisions in the Florida Constitution were carelessly written. It says that the "districts shall, where feasible, utilize existing political and geographical boundaries"

It in essence defines the district by the perimeter, rather than the area contained within. One of the metrics in the reports is miles of boundaries on county lines. I don't know about city limits - many Florida cities have boundaries that make Columbus, Ohio seem rational.

In the map-drawing recordings, they were paying a lot of attention to following major roads, when splitting counties. The problem is that highways run through the middle of smaller unincorporated communities, and also through smaller cities. There are some quite ugly splits where a boundary runs along a highway to the middle of county, and then scratches along the city limits.

[jimrtex]

Is there an Easter Island compactness metric?

[windjammer]

Apparently the State Senate just voted down their compromise map today and adjourned the session, so this is going to court just like the congressional map.  And apparently all of the plaintiff maps have at least 20 Obama 2012 districts out of 40.  Half of Florida senate elections are in presidential years and presumably everyone would have to run in 2016.  This just got very interesting!

Lmao

[Nyvin]

The vote was 16-23 against the compromise map.    Looks like the FLGOP blew it again.

[jimrtex]

The SCOFLA will hear oral arguments on the congressional maps on Tuesday.

The brief from the House argues that FL-26 diminishes the opportunity for Hispanics to elect their candidate of choice, and thus violates the Florida Constitution. In particular, the claim is that it is now a Democratic seat, and Hispanics are the 3rd largest group among Democratic primary voters. Even if the Democrats did nominate a Hispanic candidate, that does not make him the Hispanic candidate of choice.

During the district court trial, because the expert witnesses had to get out of town, their reports were accepted in lieu of direct questioning. The House's witness was from the University of Utah with a heavy Chinese accent, and the plaintiff's good-old-boy lawyer humiliated him.

The plaintiff expert was not cross-examined, but in his functional analysis apparently did not consider primary results. The trial judge said that meant the legislature accepted his testimony. The House is now saying that an expert witness has an obligation to point out that his analysis was incomplete.

It would seem that even if the SCOFLA accepts the Coalition plan, that a Hispanic voter in the area would have standing to challenge the district, at least in state court. A claim of diminished opportunity is equivalent to a retrogression claim under Section 5 of the Federal VRA, but you only have to prove non-retrogression if you are seeking preclearance. But the Florida Constitution also forbids retrogression.

A Hispanic voter might also be able to bring a claim of vote dilution under Section 2 of the VRA. Surely a Gingles district could be drawn in the area. A challenge in federal court would bypass the SCOFLA, since the SCOFLA has already ruled that the Florida Constitution is identical to Section 2 and Section 5 of the VRA.

I'm not sure what will happen in the Senate map case. If the legislature had failed to enact a map in 2002, then the legislature would been called back into special session, and if they still failed, then the SCOFLA would have original jurisdiction to draw the map.

But since the legislature did enact a plan, the SCOFLA had to review the plan. They rejected the initial plan, and the legislature had to approve a new plan, which the SCOFLA had approved.

But now you have a case before a district court claiming that the legislature and SCOFLA failed to uphold the Florida Constitution.

[jimrtex]

I've been listening to the map-drawers again.

Their tone sounds sort of like Muon2, Torie, and myself were locked in a room, and there was only one mouse. How many persons are directly involved in drawing the Iowa districts?

It sounds like they are drawing districts individually, and are playing a lot of attention to following highways. If you emphasize not splitting cities, and a top-down decomposition approach, you don't really have to worry about following highways. Population and city boundaries constrain you pretty much, that you can't do much beyond smoothing districts.

After they had drawn the districts in northern Florida, they had got hung up waiting advice from the lawyers about minority districts.

They received a memo from the lawyers, but I have not found it. But I listened to the discussion.

One question was the effect of Section 5 of the VRA. 5 counties in Florida had been covered, including Hendry and Hillsborough. They no longer had to be specifically concerned about Hendry, but had to consider retrogression for the state as a whole.

They did not have to draw a Hispanic opportunity district in the Orlando area, unless it was a performing district (you have to get up around 65% HVAP).

[Brittain33]

Are the plaintiffs' senate maps online?

[Nyvin]

It'd be good to know how much of Florida's taxpayer money has been wasted on all these failed special legislative sessions.

[jimrtex]

Are the plaintiffs' senate maps online?

Florida Senate Redistricting Website

Click on Submitted Plans on the Left Side. This page has a search box at the top of the page, but the default is the latest senate maps.

The best plan is clearly HPUBS0205, but the others are available. You will have to page through the menu to see all of the maps from the Coalition.

Click on "View Plan With District Explorer" for pretty nifty interactive viewer.

The .kmz file can be dragged into Google Earth.

The shapefiles can be used by GIS programs.

I think you could take the .doj file and perhaps get a format that DRA can handle:

The .doj file is simply a list of census-block-number, district number pairs. You can get VTD, block-number, equivalencies from the Census Bureau, or they may be available from DRA. It should be feasible to convert the actual plan to VTDs so you have access to political data.

The House also has the plans, including any documentation or explanation associated with the plans.

The explanation for HPUBS0205 is under "Letter from Coalition Plaintiffs" but is actually what I wrote.

House redistricting website - public plans

[jimrtex]

The SCOFLA hearing did not look good for the legislature. The hearing from Tuesday is here:

Florida Channel - Redistricting

Justice Pariente, who wrote the SCOFLA opinion in Reapportionment VII, did post the questioning, and was strident in her defense of the Coalition plan.

The case points out the conflict between Section 2 and Section 5 of the VRA. Section 5 requires continuation of a performing minority district, so as to not diminish an existing opportunity to elect. Section 2 requires that where there is a concentrated cohesive minority population, their votes may not be diluted.

In FL-26, the Hispanic population is perhaps 2/3 Republican, 1/3 Democrat. While Hispanics form a majority of the general election electorate, and the Republican electorate, they are only the 3rd group in the Democratic primary and represent only about 1/34 of primary voters.

Hispanic voters will vote cohesively for a Hispanic candidate in a non-partisan race. So if the Republicans and Democrats both have a Hispanic candidate, it might be argued that the Hispanic majority was not blocked from the opportunity to elect. But acting collectively, they would not have chosen the Democratic candidate.


In other redistricting news, the judge in the senate trial denied a motion by the senate to appoint a special consultant to draw a senate map. The trial will apparently be December 14-18.

[jimrtex]

I was listening to the map-drawers after they ran the functional analysis on hypothetical minority districts in Hillsborough. They had drawn a couple of districts that were similar to mine.

Draft 18:

VAP: Black 28.0% Hispanic 32.0%
2010 D Primary: Black 42.2% Hispanic 6.0%

Draft 19:

VAP: Black 29.4% Hispanic 28.6%
2010 D Primary: Black 44.0% Hispanic 5.2%

Mine:

VAP: Black 29.3% Hispanic 33.3%

I think the combined Black+Hispanic vote in the Democratic primary would just barely creep over 50%. Draft 18 is further to the west, similar to mine, and it appears that the Hispanic voters in the area are a bit better performing.

But basically, the problem is that Hispanic adults either are non-citizens or if citizen tend not to register. If they do register, a fairly substantial number are Republican (1/4 of those who are Democratic or Republican), and even if registered they don't vote.

Draft 19:

VAP: Black 28.0% Hispanic 32.0%
2012 Registered: Black 28.7% Hispanic 20.8%
2012 Voters: Black 30.9% Hispanic 18.6%

2012 Dem Registered: Black 44.9%, Hispanic 19.1%
2012 Dem Voters: Black 47.3%, Hispanic 17.2%

So while in 2010, the two minority groups could not manage 50% of the primary vote, in 2012 they comprised 64.5% of the Democratic general election vote.

But if more Hispanics turned out for the Democratic primary, then the Black percentage would drop further away from 50%, and it is far from certain that Hispanic voters would vote for a black candidate, in a primary between a white and a black candidate.

The current cross-bay district is around 60% black in the Democratic primary.

[muon2]

How does one distinguish between a racially-motivated gerrymander and an effort to promote minority interests when considering the cross-bay district?

[jimrtex]

How does one distinguish between a racially-motivated gerrymander and an effort to promote minority interests when considering the cross-bay district?

After they drew the Hillsborough-district, they scored it, and then asked the legislative counsel. In the part that I have listened to, they haven't heard back yet.

In general, they appear to be evaluating the districts as Section 5 districts.

The Florida Constitution lifted the language from Section 2 and Section 5 of the VRA.

"dilution" = Section 2 = failure to draw Gingles districts.

"diminish" = Section 5 = retrogression (without preclearance).

Gingles requires 50% of a single minority, which doesn't exist in a compact area. An area is not compact when you have to cross the bay where there are no bridges, and to use the bridges you have to travel through an area that you are deliberately excluding from the district. If you included the Interbay Peninsula, you would have (1) too many whites; (2) too many people.

You end up having to preserve what shouldn't have been created in the first place.

[jimrtex]

How does one distinguish between a racially-motivated gerrymander and an effort to promote minority interests when considering the cross-bay district?

After they drew the Hillsborough-district, they scored it, and then asked the legislative counsel. In the part that I have listened to, they haven't heard back yet.

In general, they appear to be evaluating the districts as Section 5 districts.

The Florida Constitution lifted the language from Section 2 and Section 5 of the VRA.

"dilution" = Section 2 = failure to draw Gingles districts.

"diminish" = Section 5 = retrogression (without preclearance).

Gingles requires 50% of a single minority, which doesn't exist in a compact area. An area is not compact when you have to cross the bay where there are no bridges, and to use the bridges you have to travel through an area that you are deliberately excluding from the district. If you included the Interbay Peninsula, you would have (1) too many whites; (2) too many people.

You end up having to preserve what shouldn't have been created in the first place.

OK, so there is Section 5 equivalent language that is still operative as a state matter even after the SCOTUS case killing the preclearance formula?  That's fascinating.  Does an unconstitutional map count as a basis from which to retrogress, though?  It makes the issue of a section 5-equivalent challenge very confusing because the constitutional language is new and the previous map was thrown out, while the language wasn't in place in 2002.  Since this is still effectively the first map under the new standards, what can they possibly retrogress from?  It's as if the state was founded in 2011, right?

The benchmark is the 2002 map.

Since 5 Florida counties, and Hillsborough in particular, were covered by Section 5, the 2002 map was subject to the same standards as the 2012 or 2015 map.

[jimrtex]

In preparing my Florida senate map there was an absence of building blocks below the county level. City boundaries are irregular, and in many counties, a large share of the population is in unincorporated areas.

Without clearly defined building blocks, granularity drops down to the block level, and there is an opportunity or temptation for gerrymandering.

In Florida, cities don't always abut each other, and thin features such as canals may be divided into separate blocks, corresponding to different jurisdictions. VTDs may be drawn to accommodate past gerrymanders.

While use of roads and highways as boundaries may sound useful, it forgets the reasons that the roads were built in the first place. In the 19th century, if the railroad bypassed a town, it would wither and die, and the people would move to be near the railroad. When highways were developed, they deliberately connected towns, and often used the main street. A city at the junction of two or more highways, was particularly blessed. Only when the interstates were developed, were the towns bypassed. And even then, commercial and residential development might shift towards the interstates. Highways connect, rather than divide.

Electoral units, such as wards, city council districts, and voting precincts are not suitable. District boundaries change, often at the same time that legislative and congressional districts are changing. They may have been drawn as part of past gerrymanders. They may have split communities in an attempt to equalize population. It is actually not desirable to have building blocks of extremely similar sizes when building larger districts.

Census geography, such as county subdivisions and census tracts are somewhat arbitrary, and may not reflect current settlement patterns.

I propose a nested hierarchy of counties, county areas, and neighborhoods. Minimizing the division of counties, county areas, and neighborhoods would be of paramount concern. County areas and neighborhoods would be defined well in advance of the redistricting process. They should reflect the sense of community, rather than partisan concerns.

County areas will typically correspond to incorporated cities, census designated places (CDPs), and other settlements, and may include adjacent or surrounding areas. CDPs, while defined by the census bureau is done in conjunction with local authorities, and likely have the characteristics of a city other than formal incorporation.

Neighborhoods are areas within county areas intended to be the smallest atom for constructing districts. They might well be bounded by arterial streets, rivers streams and highways. It should not be necessary to split neighborhoods in order to create legislative districts. In Florida a maximum of 12,000 or so should ensure that House districts don't need to split neighborhoods. They can be used for congressional districts as well, using the relaxed interpretation of population equality after Tennant.
A ceiling of 12,000 for neighborhoods, also establishes a floor for county areas that need not be divided into neighborhoods.

The legislature would establish the standards for county areas and neighborhoods. County governments and city governments would define the county areas, with perhaps a review by the Secretary of State. Logically, election authorities would establish election precincts within neighborhoods.

Besides being used for congressional and legislative districts, the building blocks would be used for drawing county commission and city council districts. Since these are somewhat smaller, it may be necessary to divide some neighborhoods to achieve population equality.

This map is illustrative of what county areas might look like in Miami-Dade County. This is an illustration of concept. People with local knowledge would do a better job.

My county areas are based on incorporated cities and CDP's. About 56% of the population is incorporated cities, with 36% in CDP's, and 8% in the remainder of the county. Some of this 8% is adjacent to cities or CDP's, perhaps developed after the CDPs were defined for the 2010 census, or not distinct enough from a city to place in a CDP of its own.

Miami-Dade has community councils. These are elected bodies, which provide advice on zoning and other matters in their area. There are currently 10 community council areas, which are based on groupings of CDP's. There were originally 16 community councils (and the current numbers go up to 16), but in 6 areas, a city was incorporated, and the community council in that area was dissolved.

It would be tempting to use the 10 remaining areas as "county areas". But the basic concept is that all unincorporated territory will be in a community council area, and so some areas are attached simply to be in a community council area, even though they may have a closer relationship to a city, or no relationship to a city or CDP. It would be quite reasonable to have the community councils provide advice on the boundaries of county areas.

[jimrtex]

How does one distinguish between a racially-motivated gerrymander and an effort to promote minority interests when considering the cross-bay district?

After they drew the Hillsborough-district, they scored it, and then asked the legislative counsel. In the part that I have listened to, they haven't heard back yet.

The lawyers for the senate and the house said that blacks and Hispanics were not cohesive in the primary and so the map-drawers should go into another county to maintain a black opportunity-to-elect district.

This could prove interesting in the upcoming trial. In the congressional case, the lawyers for the house and senate failed to cross-examine the plaintiff's expert witness, and whether he had considered primary results in his analysis.

[jimrtex]

How does one distinguish between a racially-motivated gerrymander and an effort to promote minority interests when considering the cross-bay district?

After they drew the Hillsborough-district, they scored it, and then asked the legislative counsel. In the part that I have listened to, they haven't heard back yet.

The lawyers for the senate and the house said that blacks and Hispanics were not cohesive in the primary and so the map-drawers should go into another county to maintain a black opportunity-to-elect district.

This could prove interesting in the upcoming trial. In the congressional case, the lawyers for the house and senate failed to cross-examine the plaintiff's expert witness, and whether he had considered primary results in his analysis.

When considering the possibility of a Hispanic opportunity seat in the Orlando area, the lawyers for the legislature were of the opinion that there was not sufficiently racially polarized voting to warrant creation of a district.

In the senate case, the plaintiffs presented their Hillsborough-only district as an alternative, and then formally withdrew it. They must have got push back from somewhere.

It appears that the House has not presented a remedial plan.

[muon2]

How does one distinguish between a racially-motivated gerrymander and an effort to promote minority interests when considering the cross-bay district?

After they drew the Hillsborough-district, they scored it, and then asked the legislative counsel. In the part that I have listened to, they haven't heard back yet.

The lawyers for the senate and the house said that blacks and Hispanics were not cohesive in the primary and so the map-drawers should go into another county to maintain a black opportunity-to-elect district.

This could prove interesting in the upcoming trial. In the congressional case, the lawyers for the house and senate failed to cross-examine the plaintiff's expert witness, and whether he had considered primary results in his analysis.

When considering the possibility of a Hispanic opportunity seat in the Orlando area, the lawyers for the legislature were of the opinion that there was not sufficiently racially polarized voting to warrant creation of a district.

In the senate case, the plaintiffs presented their Hillsborough-only district as an alternative, and then formally withdrew it. They must have got push back from somewhere.

It appears that the House has not presented a remedial plan.

There's a lot of advice about performing minority districts from legislative attorneys. Is their advice disputed by any of the other parties?