US House Redistricting: Washington

[jimrtex]

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.

[jimrtex]

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.

So, of the three ugly choices, which would you support as a member of the redistricting commission? As I understand the process in WA, the legislature can only shift up to 2% of a district's population after the commission submits a map. That would suggest that whichever of these three paths is selected by the commission cannot be changed by legislative amendment.

(3) Because it also minimizes the changes in other districts.

I'm going to try to move all the excess population into CD 8 and 9 and then split that into three districts.  I think I would be tempted to try and swap Olympia and Tacoma, so that CD 6 becomes Olympia, Bremerton, and the Olympic Peninsula.   So CD 1 transfers its portion of Kitsap to CD 6, and CD 3 shifts its excess to CD 6, CD 9 shifts its portion of Thurston, and perhaps the area around Fort Lewis to CD 6.  This hopefully will produce enough to move Tacoma into CD 9.

I move Chelan and Kittitas to CD 8, along with the excess from CD 2 and CD 7 (CD 1 may need a little to make up for the loss of the Kitsap part of its district.  8 and 9 now have enough ti create 3 districts.  If this works out the Tacoma district becomes CD 10.

[jimrtex]

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.

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.

[jimrtex]

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?

Yakima County has to be split, since LD 14 is entirely in the county.  LD 13 takes a sliver on the northern edge.  And it is a little bit different putting part of Yakima with Skamania and Klickitat and putting it in with a booming suburban area.

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.

Before the 1960s they would not have been that concerned about population equality.  I know in the 1960s bunches of LD's were shifted from east to west.  At the end of WWII, Clark was about the same population as Cowlitz and Lewis, and would be just another county that would get stuck on the end of the district

And transportation changes.  When Washington was part of Oregon Territory, Lewis and Clarke (sic) were the first two counties in the area.  Lewis was almost everything west of the Cascades.  It was more or less an accident that the current Lewis ended up where it did after all the other counties were sliced off.  Clarke was everything east of the Cascades but included Fort Vancouver.  It was actually a Columbia Basin district rather than Trans-Cascade.  But it was the part that kept the name, though it lost its 'e'.

There wasn't an interstate highway so that people could easily travel back and forth on a daily basis.

[jimrtex]

Here:

    * Districts should be convenient

It is safe to say that a district relying on Stevens Pass (ie, putting Chelan wiith the west side) could not be defended in court with a straight face.
Snoqualmie Pass is more rational, seeing as the alternatives rely on Satus Pass instead.

We're going to put Chelan and Kittitas with a King County district.  Depending on how the population works out we take a bit of Douglas as well.

[jimrtex]

I'm not going to go into too many details, but I'll say I've had multiple lengthy conversations with those directly involved in the process (including one of the members of the Redistricting Commission). You can value that as much as you wish.

The Commission itself isn't entirely opposed to the notion of a King/Kittitas district. The issue is local elected and community leaders - whose input is valued immensely in practice - are extremely opposed to being included in a district with Western Washington. They consider themselves Easterners and want to remain in a district with other Easterners. They don't feel they'll be represented by a district that crosses the Cascades. The political enmity between Eastern WA vs. Western WA runs high.

Unless the folks in Cle Elum decide for whatever reason they don't care anymore (breaking 120+ years of habit...) a district connected by one of the passes simply isn't going to happen. The Washington redistricting process isn't a touchy-feely, non-partisan exercise. It's a very political process that involves a lot of compromise and intangibles that no one outside of party insiders really notice.

Hopefully, the redistricting commission will hold hearings throughout the state, for the convenience of the locals.

Spokane, Tri-Cities, Vancouver, Olympia, Seattle, and Bellingham.   Fortunately the Seattle hearing will be convenient for the folks from Wenatchee and Cle Elum, who would get tomatoes (probably nuclear-radiated) tossed at them were they to show up in Richland.

You'll get testimony like this:  Sure its an easy drive in summer, but let me tell you as someone who drives to work everyday over Snoqualmie Pass to my job at Microsoft, or on weekends to watch the Mariners or go to the Pike Street Market it's not always nice in winter.

Let' try something entirely different.

Is it possible to draw three districts based in Eastern Washington?

For simplicity, let's assume that we have 7,000,000 people with a population equivalent to 2.2 districts in the East (1,540,000)

700,000 of that goes to a Spokane-based district.

Split the rest of the east in half (420,000) in each part.  So maybe Yakima and Tri-Cities in one, and start in Kittitas and keep going (perhaps all the way to Idaho).  You then take 280,000 from Clark County and 280,000 from King County to complete the districts.  King County will never notice the extra split.  For Clark County, can you come right along the river and take Vancouver, and then use the rest of Clark County to the north.  Does the Portland media even cover the Washington legislature, unless someone is proposing an income tax? 

This would leave 60% of the districts in the east.  This may actually be the least disruptive plan since it would take western population from the two most populous districts, and you just shift the rest of the population around to make it more balanced.

You could of course play with the numbers some, perhaps taking less of King and more of Clark.

[jimrtex]

Let' try something entirely different.

Is it possible to draw three districts based in Eastern Washington?

For simplicity, let's assume that we have 7,000,000 people with a population equivalent to 2.2 districts in the East (1,540,000)

700,000 of that goes to a Spokane-based district.

Split the rest of the east in half (420,000) in each part.  So maybe Yakima and Tri-Cities in one, and start in Kittitas and keep going (perhaps all the way to Idaho).  You then take 280,000 from Clark County and 280,000 from King County to complete the districts.  King County will never notice the extra split.  For Clark County, can you come right along the river and take Vancouver, and then use the rest of Clark County to the north.  Does the Portland media even cover the Washington legislature, unless someone is proposing an income tax? 

This would leave 60% of the districts in the east.  This may actually be the least disruptive plan since it would take western population from the two most populous districts, and you just shift the rest of the population around to make it more balanced.

You could of course play with the numbers some, perhaps taking less of King and more of Clark.

That didn't really work out but this might:

E1: Yakima, Klickitat, Skamania, Clark (has excess of 31K)

E2: Spokane, Pend Oreille, Stevens, Ferry, Lincoln, Whitman, Walla Walla, Columbia, Garfield, Asotin

E3: Kittitas, Cheland, Douglas, Okanagan, Grant, Adams, Benton, Franklin, + King 138K.

So we avoid the split in Yakima, by moving part of King County into the eastern area,

In the West:

W1: Whatcom, Skagit, San Juan, Island, Jefferson* , 231K Snohomish

Western Jefferson is almost unpopulated, so this is from the Port Townsend area.  Whether Jefferson is actually included may depend on where the split in Snohomish is.

W2: Snohomish 495K, King 184K

W3&W4: King

W5: Pierce 426K and King 254K

So King has 2 whole districts, and 184K to north, 138K to east, and 254K to southh

W6: Kitsap and Pierce 411K (needs 19K from either Mason or Thurston_

The split of Pierce appears to be unavoidable, unless Kitsap is placed in a cross-Puget Sound district.

W7: Clark 31K, Cowlitz, Lewis, Thurston, Pacific, Wahiakum, Grays Harbor, Mason, Clallam (excess of 19K from Mason or Thurston to W6).  Also includes western Jefferson.

E1: Vancouver-Yakima
E2: Spokane-Eastern Washington
E3: Tri Cities-Central Washington
W1: Bellingham-Everett(?)-Northern Washingon
W2: Snohomish suburbs-Northern King suburbs
W3: Seattle
W4: Central King suburbs (east of Lake Washington)
W5: Southern King suburbs-Eastern Pierce suburbs
W6: Tacoma-Bremerton
W7: Olympia-Pacific Coast-Western Washington

[jimrtex]

You'll get testimony like this:  Sure its an easy drive in summer, but let me tell you as someone who drives to work everyday over Snoqualmie Pass to my job at Microsoft...

There are such people and perhaps one of them would testify, but they would be unrepresentative of Cle Elum, since from my reading of this data, less than 10% of daily commuters from the town's zip code commute to the west side of the Cascades daily. It's possible to do, but one has to be dedicated and willing to commute more than 2 hours each way. It's 2 and a half hours to Redmond, combine that with getting into Seattle itself and parking to attend a hearing, I wouldn't say "convenient." 2 hours from where I live can take me into one of five other states.

http://hairycow.name/commute_map/map.html#from:98922

Not sure how many people live in the town (less than 2,000 in last census) vs. the zip code, but you're hanging your hat on a few hundred individuals to justify this, at most. Also, I'm not sure what policy purposes it serves to have this person represented by a single representative at home and at work. That would seem to be at odds with the principle of grouping urban cores together into the fewest number of districts and creating separate districts for suburbs in other states.

1 hour 14 minutes Cle Elum to Newport per MapQuest.  The hearing has moved to be more centrally located.  The 2000 center of population for King County is on Mercer Island.  To avoid a residential area, they are looking for a location near the intersection of I-405 and I-90.

[jimrtex]

Here are the historical districts up through the 70's:

So the northern district can include Clallam and Jefferson if that will help make a more convenient split in Snohomish.

[jimrtex]

I am sorry, but the notion that people commute over the Snoqualmie pass is ridiculous. The growth over the mountains may be driven by west siders, but they aren't commuting over the cascades every morning.

There are traffic cameras on the pass.  It's your job to check it out tomorrow morning and afternoon.

[jimrtex]

I am sorry, but the notion that people commute over the  is ridiculous. The growth over the mountains may be driven by west siders, but they aren't commuting over the cascades every morning.

There are traffic cameras on the pass.  It's your job to check it out tomorrow morning and afternoon.

Past the King county line presumably?

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/traffic/passes/camera.aspx

[jimrtex]

My friend who was pulling an all-nighter watched it periodically from 6 to 8 for me, and said she mostly saw big trucks.

The traffic count at North Bend is over twice that at the Kittitas-Grant line.

[jimrtex]

My friend who was pulling an all-nighter watched it periodically from 6 to 8 for me, and said she mostly saw big trucks.

I'm not sure why we're bothering to watch road traffic cameras over the pass when county employment data is readily available from the Census bureau:
http://lehdmap.did.census.gov/

Assuming I don't have this backwards, 16.3% of Kittitas County residents (on the other side of Snoqualamie Pass) work in King County, the most of any county other than Kittitas.  6.8% of people working in Kittitas County live in King County, behind Kittitas and Yakima counties.

Again, assiming I have this right, outside of the county, 789 of Kittitas county residents' primary job was in Seattle, 641 in Yakima, 270 in Bellevue and 153 in Spokane, among others.

According to the 2000 census about 8% of Kittitasian workers work in King County.

http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/commuting/mcdworkerflow.html#WA

Here is an interesting trivia.  There are two counties in Washington where the number one county of employment is not the county of residence.  What are the two counties.

[jimrtex]

According to the 2000 census about 8% of Kittitasian workers work in King County.

http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/commuting/mcdworkerflow.html#WA

Here is an interesting trivia.  There are two counties in Washington where the number one county of employment is not the county of residence.  What are the two counties.

Really? I didn't see any.

There were at least two.  One was on a state border, the other across a river from a bigger town.  It's still true in 2009.

Both are across a river from a larger town.

[jimrtex]

My guess would be Clark (more working in Multnomah) and uh, with the river hint, maybe Franklin (with more working in Benton)?

If not Clark, a more tricky answer might be Asotin. A lot of those folks work in Lewiston, ID.

Asotin is one correct answer.

It is actually pretty hard for a substantial suburban area to have more of its working outside the county than in it.  Most of its school teachers, garbage collectors, doctors, and grocery clerks will also live in the county.  If it is a small county, it might not have much internal economic activity, such as stores and doctors.  So in this case it helps that Clarkston is smaller than Lewiston.

Stevens has a pretty surprising share of its residents employed in Spokane County but its not really suburban.

The other county is also across a river from its employment destination.

[jimrtex]

The other county is also across a river from its employment destination.

It could be Douglas County, depending on if the aluminum plant is in operation.

It is Douglas County.  IS the commuting to the aluminum plant or just the city of Wenatchee?

[jimrtex]

There are traffic cameras on the pass.  It's your job to check it out tomorrow morning and afternoon.

The person I know who does the cross Cascades commute works M-Th, so you won't see him up on the pass until 7:30 PM.  

Since we are monitoring Snoqualmie Pass, any volunteers to monitor Satus Pass?  

The point was not that people commute over Satus Pass but do not commute over Snoqualmie Pass. Commutes were never mentioned by anyone until you came along, and we have now clearly demonstrated that no one commutes over either pass. (Well, no one has monitored Satus Pass, but it can be safely assumed.)

The point was that Centralia and Vancouver have a lot more in common with Yakima than Bellevue has with Ellensburg in terms of shared interests and demographics, a point you have yet to even make a serious attempt to refute.

If you go from Vancouver to Yakima (part) you don't also go to Centralia.

Eastern Washington has more than enough population for 2 districts.  Yakima is closer to Seattle than Vancouver.  The only reason that someone would travel from Yakima to Vancouver, rather than Seattle would be if they were on their way to see a professional basketball game, and even then they would cross the river and use I-84.  Ellensburg certainly has more in common with King County than Yakima (part) does with Vancouver and Portland, let alone Centralia.

Only half of the traffic that crosses Snoqualmie Pass makes it to Grant County.  So even if it is not commuters, it is retirees, escapees, etc. from Seattle.  If they can find work in Ellensburg they won't commute, but they will go to Seattle for major surgery, or to buy a car, or maybe to buy furniture.  They won't go to Spokane.

[jimrtex]

*I and brittain, and others, feel that communities with minimal commercial ties that nonetheless have similar political interests (through shared economic and demographic characteristics) are more reasonable to put together in a district than communities with some few commercial ties but few or no shared political interests, while Sounder and cinyc, and others, seem to feel the opposite. All of this assumes geographic neutrality, of course, since in either case we're cutting across a navigable but remote pass through the Cascades.

You either misunderstand or misrepresent our position.

It is not that going across the Snoqualmie Pass is great, but that splitting of Yakima or the Tri-Cities is worse.  While you claim to be putting together "communities" with similar interests you don't recognize that you are splitting a community.

By drawing a line along the Cascade crest you are claiming that there is no community of interest between King and Kittitas.  But when you draw a line through Yakima that is just a boundary line.  I claim that there is a stronger community of interest within Yakima that you are ignoring.  Now if you could explain why part of Yakima has strong ties with Vancouver, while the other has strong ties with Spokane or the Tri-Cities, I can understand why you advocate splitting the county, and perhaps even the city.

The reason that Chelan County was split off from Kittitas was because during winter people had to travel through Seattle or Spokane (where the railroads met) in order to get to the courthouse in Ellensburg.  With development of I-90 over the Snoqualmie Pass it is relative easy to get to Ellensburg from Seattle.  We know that traffic at the Kittitas-Grant line is half of that at of the Kittitas-King line.  So even if people are not commuting, they are visiting their parents who have retired, or to a 2nd home in the mountains.  And even in 2000, 8% of workers who resided in Kittitas worked in King County.

If we were to agree that a split of Yakima is not a good idea, and a district over the Snoqualmie Pass is not a good idea, let's try this:

Eastern Washington plus Skamania and Clark are apportioned 3 districts, while the remainder of the state is apportioned 7 districts.

So:

Vancouver-Yakima: Clark, Skamania, Yakima.

Spokane-Northeast: Spokane and its 4 neighbors + Ferry and Okanogan

Tri-Cities-Transcascadia-Palouse: The rest of eastern Washington.

And since we've accepted the idea of not splitting counties:

West: Thurston, Lewis, Cowlitz, Pacific, Grays Harbor, Mason, Jefferson, Clallam

King+Pierce (4 districts):  

Tacoma-Pierce West

Seattle

King East

King South-Pierce East

Snohomish

Puget Sound-Northwest:  Whatcom, Skagit, Island, San Juan, Kitsap

[jimrtex]

And despite even the 2000 census showing a number of Kittitas residents commuting to King, the commission still decided to create a Clark to Yakima legislative district instead of some sort of North Bend - Ellensburg district...

Where is the Clark to Yakima district in 2000?

But to be honest, I'm a little perplexed as to why we're arguing this again. We covered it pretty thoroughly in the first 100 posts of the thread, and I think we've all made our case for why we think each scenario is most likely. But there's really no way for us to prove it other than by waiting for the commission to draw up a map.

Speaking of legislative districts, now that we have precise 2010 numbers, perhaps we could tackle them.

Only if you draw representative districts as well.

[jimrtex]

And despite even the 2000 census showing a number of Kittitas residents commuting to King, the commission still decided to create a Clark to Yakima legislative district instead of some sort of North Bend - Ellensburg district...

Where is the Clark to Yakima district in 2000?

He's alluding to the 15th legislative district, which spans from eastern Clark County to southern Yakima County.

Yakima is necessarily split by legislative districts.

The district that extends into Clark County also includes Klickitat and Skamania whose population is concentrated along the Columbia River.  The Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area extends into Clark County.

There are 6,000 persons in the area, and the district boundary was drawn very carefully to keep out of the urbanized Vancouver area, with the boundary drawn the metropolis and Washougal.  LD 18 is drawn to include Camas and Washougal to further indicate how remote this area is from Vancouver.

The proposals from the Yakima-splitists would not only include all of Clark County but would extend northward to Centralia.

So in effect the arguement of the Yakima-splitists is: "Since legislative districts necessarily split Yakima County, and in 2000 a district was drawn that carefully took 6000 persons in the most remote area of Clark County, what can be wrong with making an unnecessary cut of Yakima County, grabbing all of the fastest growing suburban area in the state and extending far beyond into western Washington."

[jimrtex]

I see people aren't nearly as opinionated about legislative districts as they are about the great Cascades-crossing debate. I wonder why...

There are only 7500 residents in the Clark County portion of 15.  This is less than 1/2 the population of Skamania County.  You might reduce changes to current districts if you were to put North Bend in an eastern district or Cle Elum in a western district.  That possibility should not be disregarded.

[jimrtex]

*I and brittain, and others, feel that communities with minimal commercial ties that nonetheless have similar political interests (through shared economic and demographic characteristics) are more reasonable to put together in a district than communities with some few commercial ties but few or no shared political interests, while Sounder and cinyc, and others, seem to feel the opposite. All of this assumes geographic neutrality, of course, since in either case we're cutting across a navigable but remote pass through the Cascades.

You either misunderstand or misrepresent our position.

It is not that going across the Snoqualmie Pass is great, but that splitting of Yakima or the Tri-Cities is worse.  While you claim to be putting together "communities" with similar interests you don't recognize that you are splitting a community.

By drawing a line along the Cascade crest you are claiming that there is no community of interest between King and Kittitas.  But when you draw a line through Yakima that is just a boundary line.  I claim that there is a stronger community of interest within Yakima that you are ignoring.  Now if you could explain why part of Yakima has strong ties with Vancouver, while the other has strong ties with Spokane or the Tri-Cities, I can understand why you advocate splitting the county, and perhaps even the city.

The reason that Chelan County was split off from Kittitas was because during winter people had to travel through Seattle or Spokane (where the railroads met) in order to get to the courthouse in Ellensburg.  With development of I-90 over the Snoqualmie Pass it is relative easy to get to Ellensburg from Seattle.  We know that traffic at the Kittitas-Grant line is half of that at of the Kittitas-King line.  So even if people are not commuting, they are visiting their parents who have retired, or to a 2nd home in the mountains.  And even in 2000, 8% of workers who resided in Kittitas worked in King County.

If we were to agree that a split of Yakima is not a good idea, and a district over the Snoqualmie Pass is not a good idea, let's try this:

Eastern Washington plus Skamania and Clark are apportioned 3 districts, while the remainder of the state is apportioned 7 districts.

So:

Vancouver-Yakima: Clark, Skamania, Yakima.

Spokane-Northeast: Spokane and its 4 neighbors + Ferry and Okanogan

Tri-Cities-Transcascadia-Palouse: The rest of eastern Washington.

And since we've accepted the idea of not splitting counties:

West: Thurston, Lewis, Cowlitz, Pacific, Grays Harbor, Mason, Jefferson, Clallam

King+Pierce (4 districts):  

Tacoma-Pierce West

Seattle

King East

King South-Pierce East

Snohomish

Puget Sound-Northwest:  Whatcom, Skagit, Island, San Juan, Kitsap

I took a similar approach when I drew my map. Rather than start with separate districts, I looked at groupings of districts. That was especially true for the three eastern/southern districts.

You might not have appreciated that I was suggesting non-equal district populations.  The only county splits would be in King and Pierce Counties.

[jimrtex]

I'm kind of confused by something.  I just compiled Seattle precinct registered voter counts, versus 18+ Census population.  Most of it makes sense, but several wealthy neighborhoods have 100%+ registration rates.  One precinct has 426 people over eighteen and 506 registered voters.  Another supposedly had 98.8% of its 18+ voters cast a ballot in 2010, which suggests to me that it's not all people who've moved but not been marked inactive.  What's going on with that?  Is there some reason the Census would the 18+ count would underestimate (not overestimate) eligible voters?

Do Washington election precincts conform to Census Bureau Voter Tabulation Districts?

"tabulation" is a key word, in that Census Bureau tabulates data from census blocks, which don't always conform to election districts (for example, if you had an area bounded by streets but with a park area in the middle, the houses on opposite streets probably have more in common with the houses across the street than those a 1/2 mile away.

It is also up to local officials to delineate VTDs,  In Maine, they are just the intersection of legislative boundaries.  In other places they are ward boundaries, used to elect city or town council members.  Oregon didn't bother, other than in Multnomah County.  For a mail election you really don't need election precincts, since you can generate the ballots based on address and send them to each voter.  They are useful for gerrymandering, and somewhat for validating election results.  You could probably miss 10,000 votes in King County or add an extra 10,000 and no one would notice.  But if you have 2,000 extra or missing in one precinct, or a precinct where Chuck Baldwin gets 1083 votes, and Barack Obama 14, it is more likely to be checked out.

It is also possible that Washington changed its precinct boundaries after they sent their VTD definitions to the census bureau.

High income areas are likely to have high levels of civic participation, especially if it is all single family homes.  There is a greater intent to remain in Seattle.  If it is 50/50 that you will move to Los Angeles or Atlanta in a couple of years, you are more likely to rent, and less likely to care about the government, even if you are wealthy.

The Census Bureau and the governments use different definitions of residence.  Rahm Emanuel and family were probably counted by the Census Bureau as living in D.C. (or Maryland or Virginia), even though he continued to vote in Chicago.  Rich people may have multiple residences.   Seattle weather in April may not be so nice on rich old bones as Tucson or Phoenix.  It probably doesn't apply to these neighborhoods, but military personnel have some flexibility in where they live for tax purposes.  Washington is a good place to "live" since there are no state income taxes.  It is somewhat similar for voting.  So there may be some extra voters around Fort Lewis who haven't been in the state for a while.

[jimrtex]

I believe Skykomish is the northernmost pass where a road crosses the Cascades at all, so your WA-02 is clearly impermissible.

Can't you go through Canada and then take a raft down the Columbia?

[jimrtex]

Well, of course. You wouldn't need a raft; you could do that by road. But we're assuming not using international contiguity, otherwise you could connect Detroit to the UP in one district.

Ohio. Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin are not foreign countries.