US House Redistricting: Maryland

[Platypus]

Non-Partisan:



CD1 (Blue): -46; 78.0% White; 57.0% McCain
CD2 (Orange): +56; 64.7% White; 54.2% Obama
CD3 (Lime): -62; 55.8% Black; 79.4% Obama
CD4 (Red) +9; 61.3% Black; 88.8% Obama
CD5 (Yellow): +58; 59.9% White; 59.0% Obama
CD6 (Green): +21; 79.3% White; 53.0% McCain
CD7 (Black): -42; 55.1% White; 60.2% Obama
CD8 (Violet): -4; 49.9% White plurality; 73.1% Obama

Summary:

2 strong majority (55%+) Black districts
1 majority-minority district, white plurality
5 strong majority (55%+) White districts
4 safe democrat (60%+ Obama) districts
1 strong democrat (55%+ Obama) district
1 lean democrat (50%+ Obama) district
1 lean republican (50%+ McCain) district
1 strong republican (55%+ McCain) district

Max. deviation 68/100, average deviation 38.500/50.000, all districts truly contiguous, 4 counties split.

[Platypus]

This one wasn't disgusting: (hint hint)

Non-Partisan:



CD1 (Blue): -46; 78.0% White; 57.0% McCain
CD2 (Orange): +56; 64.7% White; 54.2% Obama
CD3 (Lime): -62; 55.8% Black; 79.4% Obama
CD4 (Red) +9; 61.3% Black; 88.8% Obama
CD5 (Yellow): +58; 59.9% White; 59.0% Obama
CD6 (Green): +21; 79.3% White; 53.0% McCain
CD7 (Black): -42; 55.1% White; 60.2% Obama
CD8 (Violet): -4; 49.9% White plurality; 73.1% Obama

Summary:

2 strong majority (55%+) Black districts
1 majority-minority district, white plurality
5 strong majority (55%+) White districts
4 safe democrat (60%+ Obama) districts
1 strong democrat (55%+ Obama) district
1 lean democrat (50%+ Obama) district
1 lean republican (50%+ McCain) district
1 strong republican (55%+ McCain) district

Max. deviation 68/100, average deviation 38.500/50.000, all districts truly contiguous, 4 counties split.

[Platypus]

This one wasn't disgusting: (hint hint)

Non-Partisan:



CD1 (Blue): -46; 78.0% White; 57.0% McCain
CD2 (Orange): +56; 64.7% White; 54.2% Obama
CD3 (Lime): -62; 55.8% Black; 79.4% Obama
CD4 (Red) +9; 61.3% Black; 88.8% Obama
CD5 (Yellow): +58; 59.9% White; 59.0% Obama
CD6 (Green): +21; 79.3% White; 53.0% McCain
CD7 (Black): -42; 55.1% White; 60.2% Obama
CD8 (Violet): -4; 49.9% White plurality; 73.1% Obama

Summary:

2 strong majority (55%+) Black districts
1 majority-minority district, white plurality
5 strong majority (55%+) White districts
4 safe democrat (60%+ Obama) districts
1 strong democrat (55%+ Obama) district
1 lean democrat (50%+ Obama) district
1 lean republican (50%+ McCain) district
1 strong republican (55%+ McCain) district

Max. deviation 68/100, average deviation 38.500/50.000, all districts truly contiguous, 4 counties split.

Northeastern A.A. County shouldn't be attached to Baltimore City

I fiddled around with a lot of alternatives for CD-2/CD-3, and this was the only way I could get good population equality and maintain Baltimore in one CD with a land link to the necessary extra people :/

I also realised that I was using total people, not VAP, for the ethnic groups; the two black districts remain black but the majority-minority district slips into a white majority.

[Platypus]

For me, it has to do four things:

1. Have very good population equality (within +-100 of ideal per district, and an average deviation of under 50 people).

2. Be truly contiguous, by land, ideally without bottlenecks.

3. Split up the least number of counties possible.

4. Either a) Maximise the number of competitive districts, or b) Offer safe seats that roughly split along typical vote share in the state to seat share.


And should do three more:

5.  Avoid breaking up towns and cities, unless necessary for VRA requirements.

6. Maintain a reasonable shape and compactness.

7. Maintain the nuclei of existing districts, if existing districts are not crazy Gerrymanders.

-----------

My map meets requirement 1. Requirements 2 and 3 are basically met, although there is possibility to argue that CD-2 is a series of bottlenecks and that CD-3's part of AA is a bottleneck.  I don't think that there could be less than 4 counties that include splits, and they're the same four counties that muon and timothyinMD split.

4 is always up to interpretation, but I think that it's reasonable given the other requirements to have 2 GOP, 4 Democrat, 2 swing. Using the Obama numbers inflates the Democrat's strength, and while my map is still probably slightly too much in favour of the Democrats, I'd call it 5 D, 2 R, 1 swing, which I'm certain the GOP would find acceptable given the likely final plan that actually comes through.

5 I didn't pay much attention to, but broadly, towns aren't heavily and politically split, they were split purely for population equality. Other than CD-2, I believe 6 is met quite well, and CDs 2 and 3 together make a well-shaped, compactish area. As far as 7 is concerned, I'm happy enough with it, again with the possible exception of CD-2, but all in all good, and it's not a mandatory element.

Any further considerations I should add?

[Platypus]

Don't you dar call my districts ugly again, Lewis