US House Redistricting: Washington

[bgwah]

According to the OFM, Eastern Washington grew more slowly than Western Washington.

[bgwah]

I will post my map again, even though my creepy internet stalker has already seen it

[bgwah]

It is silly to divide up the Yakima Valley because some Seattle centric types don't want any icky EWers in their district.

None of us said that. Or anything even remotely like that.

[bgwah]

Read the comments at the Seattle Times

I can usually find more entertaining ways to kill my braincells

[bgwah]

What website/program are you guys using to make your maps?

[bgwah]

Here's my version, for what it's worth. I modeled the districts off of the current map and kept all incumbents in their current seats. This meant some awkwardness on the Olympic Peninsula because Norm Dicks lives in NE Mason County while Jay Inslee lives on Bainbridge Island, yet the Olympic Peninsula should "naturally" contain only one seat. Oh well.

Hey Verily. Jay Inslee is actually running for Governor in 2012, so you shouldn't concern yourself with keeping him in the 1st district.

[bgwah]

So, if understand the dynamics in WA with 10 seats, then there is a conundrum on the east side. Either Yakima is split with the city and its immediate suburbs in different districts, or there is a transcasade link over the Snoqualmie Pass.

The numbers would also seem to support keeping Yakima intact (except perhaps for the IR) and the Cascades inviolate, but linking Benton county to Klickitat. I assume that is just as bad politically as the other options, since it would split the tri-cities.

Based on precedence (including the current 15th legislative district), I'm fairly certain Yakima County will be split.

It's really quite interesting how closely the districts have come to splitting nicely East-West over the past several decades, and I've been saying for a long time that if we get a 10th district that we'll end up with a district containing significant portions of both sides of the state.

[bgwah]

Longview can be kept in the third. Only a portion of NW Cowlitz County would need to be removed.

[bgwah]

According to the OFM, Eastern Washington grew more slowly than Western Washington.

Not very much slower.  If Washington had kept 9 districts, to keep the two in balance requires little more than moving Skamania to the east.

Going from 9 to 10 means that Eastern Washington goes from about 2 to 2.2 districts, and you have to shift 130,000 to the west.  You have 3 choices:

1) Really ugly split of Yakima County
2) Really ugly split of Tri-Cities
3) Kittitas and Chelan go west.

With most all the western population close to I-5, you end up with the districts pretty much chopping off pieces from north to south (start in Vancouver and go north until the district is full; continue in Olypmpia into Tacoma, etc.  Or you can start in Bellingham and go south.  So the 8th western district goes somewhere in the middle in the Seattle area.  But King County grew slower than the state, so to make room for the new seat it has too bulge outward.  But if you can add 130,000 in the middle, rather than the southern end, the changes are less dramatic.

I'm well aware that the Westside only grew a little bit more quickly. I have a huge post about half written up on WA redistricting that covers this... I will post it soon when I'm done.

[bgwah]

Verily, I think you're using the completely inaccurate numbers from Dave's Redistricting App... Here are the estimates from the OFM. The 8th is the fastest growing district.

Ideal district population: 673,325
1st:  740,097 (66,772)
2nd:  764,906 (91,581)
3rd:  788,476 (115,151)
4th:  763,722 (90,397)
5th:  723,794 (50,469)
6th:  707, 393 (34,068)
7th:  707,220 (33,895)
8th:  811,073 (137,748)
9th:  726,568 (53,243)

[bgwah]

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

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

[bgwah]

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

I you use Washington's numbers, the counties east of the Cascades are entitled to almost 2 of 9 districts (it is a tiny bit short which can be made by including Skamania in the east.

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

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

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

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

Or maybe not.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

[bgwah]

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

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

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

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

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

[bgwah]

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

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

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

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

[bgwah]

Do you have any old congressional maps?

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

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

Some interest things I remember:
-The 2nd used to cross the Puget Sound and included some of the Olympic peninsula
-Eastern Washington was cut horizontally between the 4th and 5th, not vertically
-1st was Seattle back in the day, IIRC

[bgwah]

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

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

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

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

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

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

These points must be the legal basis for the map:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

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

[bgwah]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[bgwah]

Thanks for posting!!! I'm pretty sure I looked at the same source as you. I also remember trying to figure out what the smallest congressional district in history was  (by land area), because I'm a dork like that. Manhattan had one with ~400,000 people per square mile or so, IIRC, but I don't remember the exact the land area off the top of my head.

[bgwah]

Also, Sounder, if you're ever at the State Archives and can get the county results for the Sen/Gov races from 1954 and 1956, then we would have a complete record back to 1914, which would be cool. Just a suggestion, since you're a lot closer to it than me. There are also some gubernatorial races before that (I managed to add 1892 and 1908) but those books are often on the brink of total destruction, so they can be difficult.

[bgwah]

I have a really good 'in' with the S.O.S., I'll see what I can do.  May take some time. 

How does it work? I went to the regional archives in Bellevue once, and I just had to tell them what I wanted and I could come take pics of it, IIRC.

[bgwah]

I added an Atlas-style 1980s CD map of Washington to the wiki, if anyone is curious. I can't find the original I drew it based off of, though... I also added Dave's 1990s and 2000s maps (with the minor edit of properly placing Tacoma in the 6th on the 90s edition).

[bgwah]

The Republicans have named their nominees to the Redistricting Commission: Former Gig Harbor State Rep. Tom Huff and (gag) Slade Gorton.

I don't know exactly why, but LOL at Gorton.

[bgwah]

Well, my gerrymander is 9-1 D!

[bgwah]

No, it's like a pretty spiral!

[bgwah]

No, it's like a pretty spiral!

I suppose. It sorta makes Seattle into a black hole though.

Evil Seattle is sucking in the good, hard-working Republicans of Eastern Washington into the black hole of liberalness.