Congressional Districts - 2016 ACS estimates.
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:20:45 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Congressional Districts - 2016 ACS estimates.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Congressional Districts - 2016 ACS estimates.  (Read 5184 times)
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 08, 2017, 02:52:18 PM »

New York

1 New York          0.972
2 New York          0.963
3 New York          1.003
4 New York          0.983
5 New York          1.136
6 New York          1.049
7 New York          1.070
8 New York          1.087
9 New York          1.016
10 New York         0.952
11 New York         1.009
12 New York         0.966
13 New York         1.176
14 New York         0.914
15 New York         1.081
16 New York         1.012
17 New York         1.028
18 New York         0.981
19 New York         0.928
20 New York         0.983
21 New York         0.958
22 New York         0.940
23 New York         0.940
24 New York         0.948
25 New York         0.978
26 New York         0.952
27 New York         0.976


With these numbers, its obvious Upstate will have to take the hit. The obvious district to cut is the 22nd, since it lacks a geographic base and is instead squished between those that do. It getting cut however probaby means a general resuffling upstate that will lock down most seats: Ithica to the 24th, Binghamton to the 23th, Rome/utica to 21st, etc.
An alternative interpretation is that NY-19 and NY-22 are merged, with the collective surplus shifted westward and southward. Kenney (New Hartford, near Utica) and Faso (Kinderhook) would be paired in a district that wraps around the southern edge of Albany.

See modified message, above.
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 08, 2017, 04:52:29 PM »

New York

1 New York          0.972
2 New York          0.963
3 New York          1.003
4 New York          0.983
5 New York          1.136
6 New York          1.049
7 New York          1.070
8 New York          1.087
9 New York          1.016
10 New York         0.952
11 New York         1.009
12 New York         0.966
13 New York         1.176
14 New York         0.914
15 New York         1.081
16 New York         1.012
17 New York         1.028
18 New York         0.981
19 New York         0.928
20 New York         0.983
21 New York         0.958
22 New York         0.940
23 New York         0.940
24 New York         0.948
25 New York         0.978
26 New York         0.952
27 New York         0.976


With these numbers, its obvious Upstate will have to take the hit. The obvious district to cut is the 22nd, since it lacks a geographic base and is instead squished between those that do. It getting cut however probaby means a general resuffling upstate that will lock down most seats: Ithica to the 24th, Binghamton to the 23th, Rome/utica to 21st, etc.

The two questions I would have is 1.  Is it possible to make a realistic district that combines Ithaca and Syracuse?

2.  Is NY-26 going to expand into the suburbs enough to make it a competitive district?

If Democrats control redistricting they would probably make #1 happen somehow, but #2 would probably be unavoidable.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 08, 2017, 11:36:00 PM »

New Jersey

1 New Jersey        0.971
2 New Jersey        0.957
3 New Jersey        0.988
4 New Jersey        0.972
5 New Jersey        0.995
6 New Jersey        1.011
7 New Jersey        0.972
8 New Jersey        1.070
9 New Jersey        1.031
10 New Jersey       1.027
11 New Jersey       0.975
12 New Jersey       1.031


New Jersey districts don't have much deviation, with only two outside 5% deviation, but the smaller districts are concentrated in the south (NJ-1 to NJ-4) or in the western suburbs (NY-5, NY-7, and NY-11). The most populous district is NY-8, opposite New York City.

To equalize population, 371K persons (4.1% of the state need to be shifted). This is about three times that which would be needed if the adjustments could be made between adjacent district.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 09, 2017, 11:09:25 AM »

With these numbers, its obvious Upstate will have to take the hit. The obvious district to cut is the 22nd, since it lacks a geographic base and is instead squished between those that do. It getting cut however probaby means a general resuffling upstate that will lock down most seats: Ithica to the 24th, Binghamton to the 23th, Rome/utica to 21st, etc.

The two questions I would have is 1.  Is it possible to make a realistic district that combines Ithaca and Syracuse?

2.  Is NY-26 going to expand into the suburbs enough to make it a competitive district?

If Democrats control redistricting they would probably make #1 happen somehow, but #2 would probably be unavoidable.
1. Not possible. NY-23 will have to already take Broome (Binghamton) and losing Tompkins would force NY-23 into Delaware, or wrapping around Tompkins. Simpler alternatives, remainder of Oswego plus Cortland exist for NY-24.

2. No. It only needs to add about 60K. Even if this were 100%R it wouldn't flip.

3. New York has a redistricting commission (approved in 2014). The legislature has to approve the plan, and could conceivably sabotage the effort - but this might be challenged successfully in state court (favoring a party or a candidate).
Logged
Tintrlvr
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,284


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 09, 2017, 12:35:46 PM »
« Edited: October 09, 2017, 12:38:22 PM by Tintrlvr »

Feel free to suggest alternative names.

New York

1 New York          0.972  Suffolk Central, East
2 New York          0.963  Suffolk-Nassau, South Shore
3 New York          1.003  Nassau-Suffolk, North Shore
4 New York          0.983  Nassau, South Shore
5 New York          1.136  Queens, Jamaica
6 New York          1.049  Queens, Flushing, Forest Hill
7 New York          1.070  Brooklyn, Williamsburg, Bushwick, Sunset Park
8 New York          1.087  Brooklyn, Bedford-Stuyvesant, East Flatbush, East New York
9 New York          1.016  Brooklyn, Kensington, Park Slope
10 New York         0.952  Manhattan-Brooklyn (Ugh), West Side, Borough Park
11 New York         1.009  Staten Island-Brooklyn, Staten Island, Bensonhurst
12 New York         0.966  Manhattan-Queens, East Side
13 New York         1.176  Manhattan, Harlem
14 New York         0.914  Queens-Bronx, Astoria
15 New York         1.081  Bronx, South and West
16 New York         1.012  Westchester-Bronx, Yonkers, Rye, North Bronx
17 New York         1.028  Westchester-Rockland, White Plains, Rockland
18 New York         0.981  Exurban New York, Newburgh, Poughkeepsie, Middletown
19 New York         0.928  Mid Hudson Valley
20 New York         0.983  Albany, Schenectady, Troy
21 New York         0.958  North Country, Plattsburgh, Jamestown
22 New York         0.940  Near West New York, Utica, Binghamton
23 New York         0.940  Southern Tier, Ithaca, Elmira, Jamestown
24 New York         0.948  Syracuse, Oswego
25 New York         0.978  Rochester
26 New York         0.952  Western New York, Buffalo Metro
27 New York         0.976  Buffalo


These estimates seem like they may not be great for estimating within counties. NY-10 and NY-12 contain some really fast-growing areas, like the Financial District/Tribeca and Hell's Kitchen/Chelsea (NY-10) and Long Island City/Astoria and Williamsburg/Greenpoint (NY-12) that are among the fastest-growing areas in all of NYC (only other genuinely fast-growing areas are the South Bronx (NY-15), Flushing (NY-6) and Downtown Brooklyn (mostly in NY-8)). It seems deeply unlikely to me that they are growing slower than the state as a whole.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 09, 2017, 12:36:23 PM »

Armory Houghton is still alive at age 91, so I guess carving up NY-23 is still forbidden.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 11, 2017, 01:19:27 PM »

Feel free to suggest alternative names.

New York

1 New York          0.972  Suffolk Central, East
2 New York          0.963  Suffolk-Nassau, South Shore
3 New York          1.003  Nassau-Suffolk, North Shore
4 New York          0.983  Nassau, South Shore
5 New York          1.136  Queens, Jamaica
6 New York          1.049  Queens, Flushing, Forest Hill
7 New York          1.070  Brooklyn, Williamsburg, Bushwick, Sunset Park
8 New York          1.087  Brooklyn, Bedford-Stuyvesant, East Flatbush, East New York
9 New York          1.016  Brooklyn, Kensington, Park Slope
10 New York         0.952  Manhattan-Brooklyn (Ugh), West Side, Borough Park
11 New York         1.009  Staten Island-Brooklyn, Staten Island, Bensonhurst
12 New York         0.966  Manhattan-Queens, East Side
13 New York         1.176  Manhattan, Harlem
14 New York         0.914  Queens-Bronx, Astoria
15 New York         1.081  Bronx, South and West
16 New York         1.012  Westchester-Bronx, Yonkers, Rye, North Bronx
17 New York         1.028  Westchester-Rockland, White Plains, Rockland
18 New York         0.981  Exurban New York, Newburgh, Poughkeepsie, Middletown
19 New York         0.928  Mid Hudson Valley
20 New York         0.983  Albany, Schenectady, Troy
21 New York         0.958  North Country, Plattsburgh, Jamestown
22 New York         0.940  Near West New York, Utica, Binghamton
23 New York         0.940  Southern Tier, Ithaca, Elmira, Jamestown
24 New York         0.948  Syracuse, Oswego
25 New York         0.978  Rochester
26 New York         0.952  Western New York, Buffalo Metro
27 New York         0.976  Buffalo


These estimates seem like they may not be great for estimating within counties. NY-10 and NY-12 contain some really fast-growing areas, like the Financial District/Tribeca and Hell's Kitchen/Chelsea (NY-10) and Long Island City/Astoria and Williamsburg/Greenpoint (NY-12) that are among the fastest-growing areas in all of NYC (only other genuinely fast-growing areas are the South Bronx (NY-15), Flushing (NY-6) and Downtown Brooklyn (mostly in NY-8)). It seems deeply unlikely to me that they are growing slower than the state as a whole.
The American Community Survey is a monthly census conducted on a sample of households. Housing units are assigned to one of five sample frames, sorting based on census tract, block number, and street address, so essentially every 5th address (including apartment and unit numbers) is in the same sample frame. These five sample frames are used in a five-year cycle, to avoid surveying the same household unit more than once in a five-year period.

Each year a sample of housing units is selected, again using geographical order. In NYC it appears that about 1/100 housing units are sampled each year. Higher sampling rates are used in areas that have less population. The ACS goal is to produce statistically significant data for counties, places with organized governments, school districts, and minor civil divisions in 12 states (ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, NJ, PA, MI, WI, and MN), plus census tracts, and block groups. If a town has 100 households, you need a relatively large sample. If you only did 1/100, you might get the family with 8 kids, a grandmother, son-in-law, and three grandchildren; or the widow. Neither is representative.

But for NYC, the only governmental units are the city as a whole, and the five boroughs (counties), so sampling is based on the census tract sizes. In NY-21 (North Country) there were roughly twice as many households sampled because of all the microscopic rural towns.

NYC said that Tribeca had 18,000 persons in 2010. If we guesstimate this represents about 9,000 housing units, then the census uses about 90 housing units for the 2016 ACS. In any case, the estimate is not based on a subestimate of county populations, but directly from a census sample from the area.

Manhattan Community Board 1 Population Change Update (PDF)

This gives a population for the entire area (Tribeca, Battery Park City, Financial District, and Seaport/Civic Center as 61K, which is less than 10% of the NY-10. Even if that area has increased by 20% since then, that would be only a 1.7% gain for the district as a whole.

Your perception of growth in the area might be based on past growth. For example, in 1970, TriBeCa had a population of 243, when it was entirely commercial. But remember that the 18K in Tribeca in 2010, including the 6K growth between 2000 and 2010 was already included in the population base for NY-10.

There are three ways to increase population:
(1) Add housing units;
(2) Increasing occupancy rates;
(3) Increase household size.

The areas are so expensive and in demand that occupancy is probably close to 100%. People who can afford to live there, might not be able to afford children. So the only way left is to increase housing units. Are there more buildings left for conversion to lofts in Tribeca? The growth in the Financial District (245% between 2000 and 2010) appears to be more the result of new construction. But with the crash in 2008, development of new buildings may have stopped. Those under construction at the time might have been completed, but perhaps after a pause as developers worked out their financing, or realized they might not be able to rent apartments immediately. Building must be a multi-year project, replatting, design, deep foundations, etc. With banks less willing to lend, it may only in the last couple of years that new buildings have begun to come on line.

There are ACS estimates at the Census Tract level, but to be statistically significant, they need accumulate data over a 5-year period. The data for 2012-2016 has not been released yet, so the latest available is for 2011-2015, which would on average be representative of mid-year 2013.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 11, 2017, 02:38:03 PM »

Armory Houghton is still alive at age 91, so I guess carving up NY-23 is still forbidden.
In 2020, the area between Lake Ontario will have just enough population for five districts. The cities are in the northern area, near the Erie Canal. With two districts for Buffalo, and one each for Rochester, and Syracuse, that leaves enough for another district, though it will experience a eastward shift as it takes Binghamton as a new largest city, replacing Elmira, Ithaca, Jamestown, and Corning.

By 2040 or 2050, there will be four districts, and the southern area will be divided among the city-based districts.

p.s. I thought you might have misspelled Amo's first name, but double-checked with a Google Search.

The first entry was for a Armory Houghton, and I thought you had made a mistake about his being alive, but it turned out that that Armory Houghton had died in the 19th Century.

There was an entry about the national guard armory in Houghton, Michigan.

And a FOIA release from the CIA that was written to Amo's dad Amory Houghton, Sr. from 1959. It was short note from SOS Allen Dulles to Houghton, who was ambassador to France at the time. Inexplicably, the transcription from a carbon copy of a typewritten dispatch said it was from Alien Dulles. I knew about Kissinger and Albright, but had not known about Dulles.

Corning Glass was founded by Amo's g-g-grandfather, Amory Houghton, Sr. There have been four Amory Houghton's over 5 generations. With Amo's grandfather, Alanson Houghton being the exception. Alanson was however a US representative for two terms (1919-1922) before becoming Ambassador to Germany, and then Great Britain.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 15, 2017, 01:07:55 AM »

Pennsylvania

1 Pennsylvania      0.969  SE
2 Pennsylvania      0.947  SE
3 Pennsylvania      0.910  W
4 Pennsylvania      0.979  SE
5 Pennsylvania      0.924  W
6 Pennsylvania      1.002  SE
7 Pennsylvania      0.949  SE
8 Pennsylvania      0.943  SE
9 Pennsylvania      0.901  W
10 Pennsylvania     0.900  NE
11 Pennsylvania     0.938  NE
12 Pennsylvania     0.918  W
13 Pennsylvania     0.990  SE
14 Pennsylvania     0.915  W
15 Pennsylvania     0.977  SE
16 Pennsylvania     0.978  SE
17 Pennsylvania     0.923  NE
18 Pennsylvania     0.938  W


Population shares are based on 17 districts (loss of one district).

The southeast region (Philadelphia metro, plus York, Lancaster, Reading, Allentown, and Bethlehem) has nine districts, and is entitled to 8.734 districts, or a deficit of about 201K, which it could easily pick up in the Harrisburg or Allentown areas. The western half of the state has six districts, and is entitled to 5.506 districts. The northeast has three districts and is entitled to to 2.775 districts.

While PA-7 deserves to die, there is no apparent way to do this in a least change regime. PA-11 is about the median for the lost district, but it is not simple to shift population to the west and south from the western end of the district. So instead PA-10 and PA-11 are merged. Collectively, the counties from Harrisburg north are sufficient to shift to PA-9, and on to the three Pittsburgh area districts (PA-12, PA-14, PA-18). The population to shift to the southeast can be from Dauphin into PA-15. None of this improves the shape of the districts.

Overall, 1.280M or 10% of the state's population would be assigned to new districts. This does not count the area in the northeast corner that is assigned to the remnant PA-10/PA-11 district.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 15, 2017, 02:27:28 AM »
« Edited: October 16, 2017, 11:14:45 AM by jimrtex »

An alternate approach is to assign whole counties to the district which contains the largest share.



Population shares are based on 2020 projections with 17 districts. Since I am using whole counties, I used the 2016 Census estimates, projected linearly to 2020, rather than the ACS.

This results in the elimination of PA-2, and making PA-1 (Philadelphia) and PA-14 (Allegheny) two-member districts. Four counties, Beaver, Indiana, Fayette, and Lebanon are isolated from the main part of their current districts. Rather than trying to reconnect these counties, which is due to connections by narrow corridors they could be considered proto-districts.

There are 23 protodistricts (18 + 4 isolated counties + 2 two-member districts - 1 eliminated district (PA-2).

We first eliminate the four isolated county districts, by assigning them to an adjacent district to better balance population.



This reduces to 19 proto-districts, two more than our goal. We eliminate the smallest district, PA-9, distributing its population among its neighbors to produce population balance, and maintain general compactness.



We still need to eliminate one more district. PA-7 is the smallest, but it consists of Delaware, and can't be divided. The next smallest is PA-10, which is distributed among its neighbors.



Finally we shift some counties to balance the population of the districts. This might have served as a plausible map prior to Wesberry v Sanders


Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 16, 2017, 08:56:51 PM »
« Edited: October 17, 2017, 07:36:14 AM by muon2 »

The method jimrtex used starts with the existing CDs and moves toward a new, more balanced set using 2020 projections. This tends to weight the preexisting CDs as a criteria. I decided to take a blank slate approach that I though would be instructive for comparison.

I also used the 2016 Census estimates and projected them out to 2020 on a county level. Then I found the multicounty UCCs and used them as seeds for the 17 districts:

Philadelphia UCC: 5.494 CDs
Pittsburgh UCC: 3.005 CDs
Allentown UCC: 0.896 CD
Harrisburg UCC: 0.707 CD
Scranton UCC: 0.693 CD
Bloomsburg UCC: 0.112 CD

The Pittsburgh UCC uncloses Greene county so effectively I had to work with a UCC of 3.053 CDs. I split that UCC, taking a pack penalty, but created a region that could be split with only Allegheny county chopped. So don't be alarmed by the strange shape of the region, since the three eastern counties make up 2/3 of a CD and would get the rest from eastern Allegheny creating a reasonably shaped district.

There are only two CDs, Williamsport and Allentown, that are outside a 0.5% tolerance from the quota. Both are close enough to the quota that no macrochops are needed. Of course it's unlikely that these projections are accurate enough for a 0.5% tolerance, but I'm using them as if they are accurate for the exercise.



Philadelphia: 7.006 CDs
Allentown: 0.979 CD
Reading: 0.999 CD
Harrisburg: 0.998 CD
Scranton: 0.997 CD
Williamsport: 1.018 CD
Altoona: 1.003 CD
Pittsburgh: 3.002 CDs
Erie: 0.999 CD

Within the Philly region, Philadelphia+Montgomery+Bucks is 4.047 CDs and the rest is 2.959 CDs. Since the shift is less than 5% it would normally mean a macrochop would be avoided. However, both Philadelphia and Montgomery are more than one CD and have to be macrochopped anyway. The extra piece which would go with a CD to the west doesn't change that.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 17, 2017, 08:23:15 AM »

Your array of counties within the Philly zone does not comport with Jimrtex's map. Berks was excised, and 3 counties to the west added. That adds up to a cover and pack penalty no?
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 17, 2017, 08:43:30 AM »
« Edited: October 17, 2017, 08:48:32 AM by muon2 »

Your array of counties within the Philly zone does not comport with Jimrtex's map. Berks was excised, and 3 counties to the west added. That adds up to a cover and pack penalty no?

Berks is not in the UCC, so there would be no penalties for my Philly region. About half a CD has to come out of Chester, leaving a pack of 5 CDs in the rest of the UCC. Ideally Philly would get 2 CDs, Bucks would add a piece from Philly and Montco to form 1 CD, Montco would get 1 CD, and a sliver of Montco would combine with Delco and a third of Chester for 1 CD.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 17, 2017, 08:59:06 AM »

Why on earth have I thought all this time that Berks was in the UCC?  Sad
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,724


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 17, 2017, 09:03:00 AM »

Why on earth have I thought all this time that Berks was in the UCC?  Sad

Because there is a small yet significant exurban region in the south of the country - in don't know.

I always find all this talk about UCCs and macrochops to be rather funny since deep down, you just know the parties will throw the idea of a good map in the garbage and create something squiggley.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 17, 2017, 09:29:24 AM »

Why on earth have I thought all this time that Berks was in the UCC?  Sad

Because there is a small yet significant exurban region in the south of the country - in don't know.

Reading forms a MSA separate from Philly and consists only of Berks. It has enough urbanized area population to be a single county UCC. Berks is part of the larger Philadelphia CSA.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's what makes Gill v Whitford so interesting. SCOTUS could for once set a standard to block political gerrymandering. If they do, it could be very narrow and affect WI and little else, or it could be expansive and apply a standard to all partisan redistricting plans. In the expansive case there will be a lot more emphasis on finding neutral standards to draw a map.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 17, 2017, 11:30:44 AM »

Has anyone in the Wisconsin case via an amicus brief or otherwise pointed out that the efficiency metric pushed by the Dems takes no cognizance of chops? In other words, any metric which focuses on chops and erosity (including - to deal with the Michigan law fail - intra-county erosity where a county is chopped), should not be characterized as an illicit gerrymander even if the result is "inefficient?"
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 17, 2017, 03:50:20 PM »

Has anyone in the Wisconsin case via an amicus brief or otherwise pointed out that the efficiency metric pushed by the Dems takes no cognizance of chops? In other words, any metric which focuses on chops and erosity (including - to deal with the Michigan law fail - intra-county erosity where a county is chopped), should not be characterized as an illicit gerrymander even if the result is "inefficient?"

I think that's going to be a point for SCOTUS to address. There are a number of issues with the efficiency test, and we had a whole thread on it earlier this year. Based on scotusblog, if the justices decide to rule that there is justicable partisan gerrymandering they may be prone to go for some version of Breyer's proposed test:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It will come down to Kennedy and whether he thinks the time has come and technology has advanced to the point that the issue can no longer be avoided. I note that Breyer's test keeps to generalities and doesn't endorse a specific metric.

As for chops and erosity, the muon rules have five measures that are generally independent of each other, two of which are political - polarization and skew. The effect of a SCOTUS ruling here could be to cap the amount of skew, much like population inequality is effectively capped by SCOTUS.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 18, 2017, 02:14:28 PM »

Why on earth have I thought all this time that Berks was in the UCC?  Sad

Because there is a small yet significant exurban region in the south of the country - in don't know.

Reading forms a MSA separate from Philly and consists only of Berks. It has enough urbanized area population to be a single county UCC. Berks is part of the larger Philadelphia CSA.
Pottstown is a Urbanized Area (more than 50,000) persons that was delineated prior to 2000 (back when the Census Bureau constructed Urbanized Areas from large places and adjacent territories). These have been grandfathered in under the new definition. When urbanized areas ran together, the Census Bureau divided them, either at an isthmus, if they just touch, or at a county line if they run together. An urbanized area can still cross into another county as long as it avoids contact. For example, Philadelphia UA goes into New Jersey northwest of Trenton (in Hunterdon). Philadelphia UA reaches the Berks and Lehigh county border, but would be blocked from much further advancement by Allentown and Reading UAs. The Allentown UA also extends into northern Bucks. The Pottstown UA does extend into Berks.

Urbanized areas can absorb Urban Clusters (urban areas < 50,000 person) so it may depend on whether areas can be established separate from the main area before they get overrun.

There wasn't a separate Wilmington, DE urbanized area so, the Philadelhia, UA (and MSA) now extends into Maryland. Philadelphia is now blocked by Lancaster, Baltimore, Dover, and Vineland UA. Proto-CBSA (core-based statistical areas) are defined by the dominant urban area in each county.

So Montco is part of the Philadelphia MSA, while there is no MSA associated with Pottstown. It is possible for a proto-CBSA to be captured by another MSA by commuting patterns. Reading is far enough out to have its own job centers, plus the ordinary local workers (grocery stores, schools, doctors, etc.) plus some of the commuting will be from Berks into Lehigh, which reduces the percentage that could commute into the Philadephia Proto-MSA whether Montco, Bucks, and Chester or Philadelphia.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 18, 2017, 07:09:31 PM »

Has anyone in the Wisconsin case via an amicus brief or otherwise pointed out that the efficiency metric pushed by the Dems takes no cognizance of chops? In other words, any metric which focuses on chops and erosity (including - to deal with the Michigan law fail - intra-county erosity where a county is chopped), should not be characterized as an illicit gerrymander even if the result is "inefficient?"
The plaintiffs in Wisconsin had an automated program that claimed it took counties and municipalities into account in drawing boundaries (they generated 2000 maps), but their metric appears to be number of small counties that were chopped. Since Milwaukee can't fit in a single district, it doesn't matter how many times you cross the border.

And even then they did a mediocre job, with around 20 small counties kept whole (vs. my 40+). But they did do more than the legislature did.

A telling example of how bad there program was, was that they did not have one map that kept Columbia as a single district (0 for 2000), when they should have gone 2000 for 2000.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 22, 2017, 12:45:14 AM »

The Census Bureau has recalculated the 2010 Census results for the 115th Congress (2017-2019) for Virgnia, Florida, North Carolina and Minnesota.

Did something not-so-nice happen in Minnesota?
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 23, 2017, 07:58:34 AM »

The Census Bureau has recalculated the 2010 Census results for the 115th Congress (2017-2019) for Virgnia, Florida, North Carolina and Minnesota.

Did something not-so-nice happen in Minnesota?

What did they find?
Logged
Dr. MB
MB
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,813
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 23, 2017, 10:46:05 PM »

Montana definitely needs a 2nd one.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 23, 2017, 10:48:41 PM »

New York

1 New York          0.972
2 New York          0.963
3 New York          1.003
4 New York          0.983
5 New York          1.136
6 New York          1.049
7 New York          1.070
8 New York          1.087
9 New York          1.016
10 New York         0.952
11 New York         1.009
12 New York         0.966
13 New York         1.176
14 New York         0.914
15 New York         1.081
16 New York         1.012
17 New York         1.028
18 New York         0.981
19 New York         0.928
20 New York         0.983
21 New York         0.958
22 New York         0.940
23 New York         0.940
24 New York         0.948
25 New York         0.978
26 New York         0.952
27 New York         0.976


With these numbers, its obvious Upstate will have to take the hit. The obvious district to cut is the 22nd, since it lacks a geographic base and is instead squished between those that do. It getting cut however probaby means a general resuffling upstate that will lock down most seats: Ithica to the 24th, Binghamton to the 23th, Rome/utica to 21st, etc.
An alternative interpretation is that NY-19 and NY-22 are merged, with the collective surplus shifted westward and southward. Kenney (New Hartford, near Utica) and Faso (Kinderhook) would be paired in a district that wraps around the southern edge of Albany.

See modified message, above.

A district that straddles the state like NY-19 usually has to change quite a bit.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 24, 2017, 01:20:06 PM »
« Edited: October 26, 2017, 04:37:07 PM by jimrtex »

The Census Bureau has recalculated the 2010 Census results for the 115th Congress (2017-2019) for Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and Minnesota.

Did something not-so-nice happen in Minnesota?

What did they find?
I'm not sure what you mean by "they" and "find".

Anyhow, I compared the 113th data and the 115th data, and the 115th data moved 3 people from MN-6 to MN-7 (the CD populations are no longer within 1, with MN-7 and MN-6 now having a deviation of +/- 3.

The change occurred in Munson Township of Stearns County, which is the only subdivision in the county divided between CD's. The city of Richmond is mostly in the PLSS township for Munson, and in MN-6,

The area that was moved is on the western edge of Richmond, and the only way to get to it from the remainder of MN-6 in Munson, is through Richmond. It appears that the census blocks don't actually conform to the city limits. When the map drawers were dividing Munson, it would be natural to put that area in MN-7. It is likely that the area with the three persons was actually in Richmond, but not recognized by the Census Bureau. This would then have required Richmond to be divided between the two CD's, with 3 persons being in MN-7.



For the 115th Congress, MN-6 is the dark green portion of Munson Township, along with the city of Richmond, and townships to the northeast, east, southeast, and south. MN-7 is the pale yellow portion of Munson Township, along with townships to the north, northwest, west, and southwest, and the city of Roscoe.

The triangular exclave in the southeastern part of Richmond was in MN-6 for the 113th Congress, and is simply an unincorporated island in the city. The area that was added for the 115th Congress is the dark green blob on the northwestern edge of Richmond.

The current congressional districts were drawn by a court, and don't appear to have been enacted into statute. It is conceivable that everyone simply assumed that all of Richmond was in MN-6 (in 2012 and 2014 and 2016 it had one precinct and was in MN-6. Perhaps some looked at the actual map, and if the court retained jurisdiction changed the map, and the Census Bureau was informed.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.074 seconds with 12 queries.