IDS Districting Commission

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Upon confirmation, I have decided to create this thread so we can begin to discuss districting plans for two seats of our Legislature.

I recounted the number of people living in each state and compiled party data for us to work with.  Let's get started.


Population (TOTAL: 29)

AL
Lab: 1

AR
D-R: 1
Pro: 1

FL
Fed: 1
CMP: 1
Ind: 1

GA
Labor: 2
Fed: 1
Oth: 1

LA
Fed: 1

MS
Fed: 1

NC
Fed: 1
Lab: 1
Ind: 1

SC
Ind: 1
Fed: 3

TN
Pro: 1
Ind: 1

TX
Ind: 1
Lib: 1
Fed: 3
Pro: 1
D-R: 2

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Good work, Scott. Given that this first commission has the potential to be something that future commissions look to for guidance, I think we should take the opportunity to decide what criteria we will use to draw our districts.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Thank you, Emperor.

I think that, first and foremost, we need to ensure that the districts are as competitive as possible.  The map doesn't have to look clean, too, but aesthetics should be taken into account as well so that they don't appear gerrymandered.

Here is another proposal of mine-

District 1 (Red):
Lab: 1
Lib: 1
Fed: 6
CMP: 1
Ind: 2
Pro: 1
D-R: 2

District 2 (Blue):
D-R: 1
Pro: 2
Lab: 3
Fed: 5
Oth: 1
Ind: 3

Obviously the Federalists are going to have an advantage in both districts simply because they are more populous and spread out in this region, but I think this composition keeps the districts remotely competitive.

[Bacon King]

looks like you guys have three possibilities for a contiguous and even split

TX LA MS AL FL: 14
AR TN GA SC NC: 15

TX AR LA TN MS AL: 15
FL GA SC NC: 14

TX AR LA TN: 14
AL FL GA SC NC: 15

[Donerail]

Proposed list of criteria:

[ ] Districts may not be intentionally drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or party
[ ] Districts must be contiguous and should be reasonably compact
[ ] Districts must be as equal in population as is feasible
[ ] Districts must make use of existing geographical and cultural boundaries where feasible

I agree with Scott's map - the most equal split possible. It also keeps together most of the Eastern Seaboard and the Carolinas in District 2, and all of the Gulf South in District 1, in contiguous districts. Neither favor a particular party (apart from the default Federalist favor due to numbers) nor a particular incumbent.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Proposed list of criteria:

[ ] Districts may not be intentionally drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or party
[ ] Districts must be contiguous and should be reasonably compact
[ ] Districts must be as equal in population as is feasible
[ ] Districts must make use of existing geographical and cultural boundaries where feasible

I agree with Scott's map - the most equal split possible. It also keeps together most of the Eastern Seaboard and the Carolinas in District 2, and all of the Gulf South in District 1, in contiguous districts. Neither favor a particular party (apart from the default Federalist favor due to numbers) nor a particular incumbent.

     I like the proposed list, though I doubt that compactness would be an issue for us since we only have 10-11 units to split among the districts. Oftentimes compactness is raised as an issue for US House districts, but they can have thousands of precincts to split among dozens of districts, so that can become a real mess. As long as we require contiguity and do not permit state-splitting (which would be meaningless for us since we don't register below the state level), no really ugly district should be possible.

[Dereich]

Does Puerto Rico have anyone in it at this point? I'm pretty sure it still counts as a state but none of these maps incorporate it.

[Donerail]

Does Puerto Rico have anyone in it at this point? I'm pretty sure it still counts as a state but none of these maps incorporate it.

It counts as a state but it has no population. I'd lump it in with whichever map has a lower population.

Fair enough point on compactness - which is why I had it as a subpoint of contiguity and just a 'should be reasonably'. Not that big an issue, though it's something nice to have.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     PR borders only FL, assuming that we follow the traditional Atlasian redistricting rules. The thought occurs to me that we could make PR border other states as well.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Are there any new proposals or ideas for redistricting guidelines to consider?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     As Bacon King pointed out above, the dual criteria of population equalization and contiguity reduces us to three possible maps, which is good since they are both fairly objective criteria and will get any commission moving quickly.

     With that done, I think we really just need a map that maximizes competitiveness. Considering the prevalence of incumbent protection gerrymanders in real life, I would suggest defining maximal competitiveness as a minimal average party advantage, or the average relative difference in strength between the favored party and its rival. The issue I see is deciding how to handle that consideration with more than two parties.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Okay, so here is BK's other proposal.

District 1 (Red)
Ind: 2
Lib: 1
Lab: 1
Fed: 5
Pro: 3
D-R: 3

District 2 (Blue)
Fed: 6
CMP: 1
Ind: 3
Lab: 3
Oth: 1


The other combination didn't have MS in it, so I didn't make a map for that.

[Supersonic]

I assume I'm allowed to comment here. Anyhow. I don't mind either of the proposals thus far. Although BK's is more pleasing on the eyes. So long as Mississippi and Alabama are not split apart (that would be blasphemous), it's all good.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

The Federalists make a plurality of the voters in both districts in both our map proposals.  This might be as competitive as they can get.

[Enderman]

I'm not in the committee, but I have a proposal.

Population (TOTAL: 29)

District 1:

Lab: 2
D-R: 3
PRO: 3
Fed: 2
Ind: 3
Lib/Other: 1

District 2:

Lab: 2
Fed: 4
Oth: 1
Ind: 1

District 1 is diverse and could be more interesting, but District 2 has a better tendency to be supporting the incumbent and yet be competitive...

And Scott, who's that Other in District 2 (Georgia)?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Enderman's proposal gives me an idea. If we shift one state over from that, we get:

     Which is contiguous, even, and reflects a nice cultural divide (deep South and upper South). Thoughts?

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

     Enderman's proposal gives me an idea. If we shift one state over from that, we get:

     Which is contiguous, even, and reflects a nice cultural divide (deep South and upper South). Thoughts?

In that map, District 2 would have five Federalists and four non-Federalists, virtually guaranteeing the seat for them.

[Supersonic]

I'm playing devil's advocate, but we're assuming all Federalists will vote party line.

Just saying.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Oh well, it was a thought.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

How should we decide on the map?

[Associate Justice PiT]

I know I'm not part of this commission, but I suggest approval voting (at least to narrow it down).

     I like this suggestion.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Okay.  I'll list the maps we've created and hold a vote.

MAP 1:

District 1 (Red):
Lab: 1
Lib: 1
Fed: 6
CMP: 1
Ind: 2
Pro: 1
D-R: 2

District 2 (Blue):
D-R: 1
Pro: 2
Lab: 3
Fed: 5
Oth: 1
Ind: 3

MAP 2:

District 1 (Red)
Ind: 2
Lib: 1
Lab: 1
Fed: 5
Pro: 3
D-R: 3

District 2 (Blue)
Fed: 6
CMP: 1
Ind: 3
Lab: 3
Oth: 1

MAP 3:

District 1:

Lab: 2
D-R: 3
PRO: 3
Fed: 2
Ind: 3
Lib/Other: 1

District 2:

Lab: 2
Fed: 4
Oth: 1
Ind: 1

MAP 4:

Please vote in the order of preference.

[] Map 1
[] Map 2
[] Map 3
[] Map 4

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

[1] Map 1
[2] Map 2
[3] Map 3
[4] Map 4

[Donerail]

[1] Map 1
[2] Map 3
[3] Map 2
[4] Map 4

[Associate Justice PiT]

[1] Map 1
[2] Map 3
[3] Map 4
[4] Map 2