US House Redistricting: Michigan

[minionofmidas]

The solution that suggests itself, in getting Rogers to move: Make the district both he and McCotter are in losable (but not too losable, obviously - you want to actually hold it). Make the new district that includes a lot of his old territory, but not his home, and no incumbent whatsoever, unlosable. in other words, give him an incentive to move. He's much too influential to just be forced out by McCotter.

[dpmapper]

Wouldn't MI-13 have to add that last precinct of Grosse Pointe Shores in Macomb County, due to the "minimize township splits" provision of the statute? 

[Torie]

Wouldn't MI-13 have to add that last precinct of Grosse Pointe Shores in Macomb County, due to the "minimize township splits" provision of the statute?  

I think it could go either way, but come to think of it, I think it is a good idea to absorb the one town that crosses over into Macomb in to MI12, and in exchange, MI-13 could take a few more Dem precincts in Warren. Doing that much anyway, should be legally safe. That might generate a few basis points. I will try it.

Wait a minute. Gross Pointe Shores does not cross over. The lines on the Bradlee software imply that it does, but the city is wholly within Wayne, and that precinct that looks like it is Macomb, is Lake Township. So no, there is no cross over.

[Torie]

The solution that suggests itself, in getting Rogers to move: Make the district both he and McCotter are in losable (but not too losable, obviously - you want to actually hold it). Make the new district that includes a lot of his old territory, but not his home, and no incumbent whatsoever, unlosable. in other words, give him an incentive to move. He's much too influential to just be forced out by McCotter.

Rogers already had a sizable chunk of Oakland. Geography and Michigan law limits how the pawns can be moved around, particularly with that wall that MI-14 generates via its trip to Pontiac.

[dpmapper]

Here's the map I think Torie has in mind for SE MI. This map has each district within 100 of the ideal population. It's what I've expected for some time with CD 13 (54.2% black VAP) and 14 (56.8% black VAP) each splitting into Oakland and Macomb to allow a district wholly contained in each of those counties. I use CD 8 from Livingston as the balancer per Torie's suggestion. I'll let him check this against his precinct tables for PVI.

It's a very sexy map. 

However, there are some minor issues, many of which have been discussed:

* Rogers has to move. 
* Given that you're getting rid of two Dem districts, McCotter and Rogers have districts that are probably too strong, esp. considering that they're fairly strong incumbents anyway. 
* Miller's district is only lean-GOP and Levin will probably hop over to try to challenge her, given that he has nowhere else to run.  She might not like that.
* Camp has to take the thumb, which means he has to get Bay County, and the leftovers from Genesee (since Kildee is taking Lansing).  That makes his district quite marginal (and he won't even be able to keep all of his home county, much less most of his current district). 
* Walberg has to take Monroe and the Washtenaw leftovers, plus (probably) parts of the Lansing area.  Quite possibly too much for him to handle. 

However, there is a solution - I noticed that the Genesee leftovers from Kildee will almost exactly match Livingston's population.  So swap them for Livingston:



Rogers doesn't have to move, and he can easily take the rest of Washtenaw as well as the rest of the Lansing area (which he currently represents anyway), now that Lansing proper is out of his district, saving Walberg.  Camp has more room to breathe.  Levin and Peters might fight over the bronze seat, leaving Miller free rein in Macomb, and whoever wins will still have a serious fight on their hands.  I can't run the intra-county numbers and might not have chosen which precincts to put where properly, but might this work just as well?  Or are the Flint suburbs too Democratic to add to northern/eastern Oakland? 

[cinyc]

Wouldn't MI-13 have to add that last precinct of Grosse Pointe Shores in Macomb County, due to the "minimize township splits" provision of the statute?  

I think it could go either way, but come to think of it, I think it is a good idea to absorb the one town that crosses over into Macomb in to MI12, and in exchange, MI-13 could take a few more Dem precincts in Warren. Doing that much anyway, should be legally safe. That might generate a few basis points. I will try it.

Wait a minute. Gross Pointe Shores does not cross over. The lines on the Bradlee software imply that it does, but the city is wholly within Wayne, and that precinct that looks like it is Macomb, is Lake Township. So no, there is no cross over.

That precinct in Macomb WAS Lake Township until April 1, 2009.  It is now part of the city of the Village of Grosse Pointe Shores, along with the former Grosse Point Township in Wayne County.  It was part of the village of Grosse Pointe Shores prior to its incorporation as a city - but still a separate township.  Not any more.

[freepcrusher]

here are my proposed lines. They are fairly similar to the old lines and still compact.

[freepcrusher]

1st District Dan Benishek (R–Crystal Falls) 92.2% White
Not much different. Basically an upper peninsula district that is swing territory. TOSSUP

2nd District Bill Huizenga (R–Zeeland) 84.4% White. Most ancestrally republican area of Michigan and it includes the Dutch colony in Ottawa County. Probably has a PVI of R+7. Likely Republican

3rd District Justin Amash (R–Cascade Township) 78.9% White. Takes in Grand Rapids (which has long been republican and where Ford used to represent) and some nearby rural counties. Probably an R+3 like district. Lean Republican.

4th District Dave Camp (R-Midland) 91% White. Tossup

5th District Dale Kildee (D-Flint) 76.6% White. Safe Dem.

6th District Fred Upton (R-St. Joseph) 81.1% White Tossup

7th District Tim Wahlberg (R-Tipton) 83.1% White. With Ann Arbor excised out of the old 15th and added to this district, it makes it competitive. Tossup district.

8th Mike Rogers (R-Brighton) 84.9% White. While Lansing is not as strongly democratic as Ann Arbor, it is still very democratic giving Obama 65% of the vote. With Lansing in the district, this is now a tossup district.

9th Gary Peters (D-Bloomfield Township) 76.3% White. Takes in the independent minded Detroit suburbs. Peters survived 2010 so he should be okay for the long run. Lean Dem

10th Candice Miller (R-Harrison Township) 88.4% White. Takes in most of Macomb and St Clair counties. The more republican areas to the north have been excised however and put in the 5th district. Lean Republican

11th Thad McCotter (R-Livonia) 80.1% White. Considering this contains Wayne County (which is strongly dem) and Oakland County (which is swing country), this is probably a lean dem district based on PVI. But McCotter seems to run well here despite his R affiliation. I'll say this is a Lean GOP district.

12th Sander Levin (D-Royal Oak) 59.4% White. This guy survived 1994 and 2010 and this district now takes in part of Wayne County. Safe Democrat


13th Hansen Clarke (D-Detroit) vs.
 John Conyers (D-Detroit)
49.6% Black, 36.8% White, 9% Hispanic, 2.2% Other, 2% Asian, .4% Native American
Since Detroit lost a lot of population, the old 13th had to take in most of the 14th. Conyers would win the primary here due to his seniority.

14th John Dingell (D-Dearborn) 59.1% White. If he's been re-elected nearly 30 times, they aren't going to just stop electing him. He is even more safe here as it adds some hyper-dem precincts from the Conyers' district. Dingell may retire soon though.

[cinyc]

So you have zero black majority districts in a state that the VRA likely requires there be two?  It's probably a non-starter without adjusting some lines.

[krazen1211]

here are my proposed lines. They are fairly similar to the old lines and still compact.

What exactly are you trying to accomplish with that map? It's not a GOP gerrymander for sure, and its not a Democratic gerrymander; I'm trying to figure out why you would split Detroit 3 ways and then move Ann Arbor into a GOP district.

[Torie]

None of the maps above are legal. Sorry.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Far too many unnecessary county/community splits, among other things.

[dpmapper]

OK, after further review my map is not legal; the cycle of the Kildee/Rogers/Dingell/McCotter/bronze districts, each edge of which splits a county, could be rotated in some fashion (since none are VRA protected) so as to eliminate one county split.  Nuts. 

But I think some of Torie's assumptions are incorrect as well.  First off, since the statute's secondary guidelines say that avoiding county splits takes precedence over city/town splits, there is no "nose under the tent" argument - you can't create a county split in order to avoid a town split.  So you can't sneak a Macomb district into the Pointes just for that reason. 

More importantly, I think that you can't argue that the VRA districts demand a double crossing of the Oakland-Wayne border.  Yes, if one of the districts contains the Pointes, then the other district must go into Oakland; this is (probably) true.  But that just argues for using that district to be the sole population equalizer.  For instance, you could have 1 black district (including Pointes) plus one white district entirely within Wayne, use the 2nd black district to split the Oakland Wayne border, put one more district entirely within Oakland, and then go from there.  Unless there's a fortuitous way to somehow avoid yet one more county split by doing the double crossing, I think you have to avoid it. 

[Torie]

OK, after further review my map is not legal; the cycle of the Kildee/Rogers/Dingell/McCotter/bronze districts, each edge of which splits a county, could be rotated in some fashion (since none are VRA protected) so as to eliminate one county split.  Nuts.  

But I think some of Torie's assumptions are incorrect as well.  First off, since the statute's secondary guidelines say that avoiding county splits takes precedence over city/town splits, there is no "nose under the tent" argument - you can't create a county split in order to avoid a town split.  So you can't sneak a Macomb district into the Pointes just for that reason.  

More importantly, I think that you can't argue that the VRA districts demand a double crossing of the Oakland-Wayne border.  Yes, if one of the districts contains the Pointes, then the other district must go into Oakland; this is (probably) true.  But that just argues for using that district to be the sole population equalizer.  For instance, you could have 1 black district (including Pointes) plus one white district entirely within Wayne, use the 2nd black district to split the Oakland Wayne border, put one more district entirely within Oakland, and then go from there.  Unless there's a fortuitous way to somehow avoid yet one more county split by doing the double crossing, I think you have to avoid it.  

Where is the text about county lines taking precedence in the statute?  [Oh, I see, breaking as few county lines as possible is a higher priority. I think you may be right. In any event, I would only break into Wayne to take the two precincts in Gross Pointe Shores on the grounds of avoiding a town split. That might be deemed reasonable. But it is not worth litigating.]

Are you saying Dingell's white CD in Wayne needs to take over McCotter's MI-11 territory in Wayne?  If so, where does MI-11 get its population back?  Won't it have to split another county?

[Verily]

here are my proposed lines. They are fairly similar to the old lines and still compact.

What exactly are you trying to accomplish with that map? It's not a GOP gerrymander for sure, and its not a Democratic gerrymander; I'm trying to figure out why you would split Detroit 3 ways and then move Ann Arbor into a GOP district.

The district containing Washtenaw would definitely be a Democratic district. Washtenaw would be almost half of the district, and the area in it is about the same as the county--69% Obama. The rest is around 51% Obama, so there's no way a Republican could win that seat.

But, yeah, it's illegal. Way too many county splits.

[dpmapper]

Are you saying Dingell's white CD in Wayne needs to take over McCotter's MI-11 territory in Wayne?  If so, where does MI-11 get its population back?  Won't it have to split another county?

Count your county splits.  You've got 4 districts hence 3 splits in Wayne, 2 splits in Oakland, 1 in Macomb, 1 in Washtenaw already, and 6 districts down.  Each new district you add will add another split (eg, the district that takes the rest of Washtenaw will likely terminate in a partial county somewhere) except for the last one. So that's 7 more splits, for a total of 14. 

You can definitely do it with 13 splits only; what I suggested involved one black district in Wayne, one white district in Wayne, and one black district spanning Wayne/Oakland.  That's 2 splits there.  Add one district entirely in Oakland.  Oakland is now split twice, since there are leftovers, and I have four splits for four districts down.  Each new district adds a new split where it terminates (save the last district) so this ends with 13 splits.   

[dpmapper]

Here's a map that gets it down to 12, but only because Upton's district fits perfectly in one set of counties.  (There are 2 county splits up north that aren't shown.)



It's a 5-Dem plan; I'm not sure there's a way to get it down to 4.5 without moving McCotter's district entirely out of Wayne, since if you soak up the Oakland blacks with a Wayne district, McCotter seemingly can't go anywhere other than Washtenaw, and if you don't, then you have to concede a district in Oakland. 

[Torie]

Are you saying Dingell's white CD in Wayne needs to take over McCotter's MI-11 territory in Wayne?  If so, where does MI-11 get its population back?  Won't it have to split another county?

Count your county splits.  You've got 4 districts hence 3 splits in Wayne, 2 splits in Oakland, 1 in Macomb, 1 in Washtenaw already, and 6 districts down.  Each new district you add will add another split (eg, the district that takes the rest of Washtenaw will likely terminate in a partial county somewhere) except for the last one. So that's 7 more splits, for a total of 14. 

You can definitely do it with 13 splits only; what I suggested involved one black district in Wayne, one white district in Wayne, and one black district spanning Wayne/Oakland.  That's 2 splits there.  Add one district entirely in Oakland.  Oakland is now split twice, since there are leftovers, and I have four splits for four districts down.  Each new district adds a new split where it terminates (save the last district) so this ends with 13 splits.   

Yes, you have one less split because you excised Wastenaw from the map. Unless there is one county somewhere that has exactly 33,000 people or whatever, there will be another split elsewhere. I will engage in the exercise however, of seeing if another map results in fewer splits than mine. I tend to doubt it however.

[dpmapper]

Yes, you have one less split because you excised Wastenaw from the map. Unless there is one county somewhere that has exactly 33,000 people or whatever, there will be another split elsewhere. I will engage in the exercise however, of seeing if another map results in fewer splits than mine. I tend to doubt it however.

Count the splits.  I've got one fewer than you; once you take care of Oakland and Wayne, the remaining county splits needed should be exactly one less than the number of districts you need to draw (at most).  It doesn't matter that Washtenaw isn't drawn yet. 

In fact, I just rejiggered some things so that there are 11 county splits.  If districts 1 and 2 take in everything north of the Clare-Isabella latitude line, plus everything on Lake Michigan from Ottawa north, plus Newaygo, Mecosta and Lake, that's exactly right.  

[Torie]

Yes, you have one less split because you excised Wastenaw from the map. Unless there is one county somewhere that has exactly 33,000 people or whatever, there will be another split elsewhere. I will engage in the exercise however, of seeing if another map results in fewer splits than mine. I tend to doubt it however.

Count the splits.  I've got one fewer than you; once you take care of Oakland and Wayne, the remaining county splits needed should be exactly one less than the number of districts you need to draw (at most).  It doesn't matter that Washtenaw isn't drawn yet. 

In fact, I just rejiggered some things so that there are 11 county splits.  If districts 1 and 2 take in everything north of the Clare-Isabella latitude line, plus everything on Lake Michigan from Ottawa north, plus Newaygo, Mecosta and Lake, that's exactly right.  

Would you put up your map again, and explain to me which CD's of yours are 50% black VAP? So many maps are flying around, that I am confused now. It would be nice if each map were attended by some stats on these sorts of things. Thanks.

[dpmapper]

Tan is 52.2% VAP black.  Bronze is 50.2% VAP black. 




Here's the larger picture.  3 county splits in Wayne, 1 each in Oakland, Macomb, Monroe, Ingham, Eaton, Saginaw, Isabella, and one not seen in Traverse between CDs 1 and 2. 

[Torie]

OK, you have a chop in Monroe rather than Washtenaw. Other than that, if you select my plan A where there is no third CD in Oakland, we have the same number of chops in the Livingston, Washtenaw, Wayne, Oakland, Monroe and Macomb package.  The issue is whether my plan B, with has a tri-chop of Oakland, rather than a bi-chop, can be offset by one less chop on the other side of the CD's in play, either directly with MI-07 or MI-10, or indirectly by the generation of clean lines in the next ring of CD's out. At the end of the day, we both have to have an extra chop for that 130,000 in excess population in the five county region (the above mentioned counties sans Monroe); there is no escaping that. You took care of it by cutting out Livingston, which was replaced with Dingell taking the rest of Wastenaw, less the bite out of his CD on the south end by MI-07.  There is no magic wand here - just county lines and numbers.

And I assure you, that the Pubbies will pick one of my chops depending on the final number of county splits dictating which one, rather than yours. Sorry about that.

[dpmapper]

OK, you have a chop in Monroe rather than Washtenaw. Other than that, if you select my plan A where there is no third CD in Oakland, we have the same number of chops in the Livingston, Washtenaw, Wayne, Oakland, Monroe and Macomb package.  

Which is your "plan A" map?  I too am lost amid this flurry of mapmaking.   

[muon2]

 



Here's the larger picture.  3 county splits in Wayne, 1 each in Oakland, Macomb, Monroe, Ingham, Eaton, Saginaw, Isabella, and one not seen in Traverse between CDs 1 and 2.  

It looks like you are relying on the near equality of population for your CD 6. I get a value that is over by 299 persons. That isn't going to be exact enough for MI, so you will need at least one additional county split somewhere.

[Torie]

OK, you have a chop in Monroe rather than Washtenaw. Other than that, if you select my plan A where there is no third CD in Oakland, we have the same number of chops in the Livingston, Washtenaw, Wayne, Oakland, Monroe and Macomb package.  

Which is your "plan A" map?  I too am lost amid this flurry of mapmaking.    

Plan A



Plan B