Fair Redistricting (PA aftermath)

[cvparty]

I'll be a Dem.

No.

i can be da independent

[cvparty]

So the first question is does the panel draw the map or do they select from publicly-submitted plans (ie including posters who aren't on the panel)?

The second question is what criteria will the panel use to evaluate plans?

hmm maybe
1) have a thread for each state where anyone can propose a map
2) each committee member selects 1 or 2 maps
3) the committee votes whether to approve each of these maps (3/5 needed for a pass)
4) the remaining maps are ranked (à la STV) and the one with most votes is the winning map

as for criteria (ranked by importance)
1) has contiguous districts (water contiguity allowed, but should be connected by something like a bridge)
2) population deviation is within 0.5%
3) districts are representative of the state’s overall partisan composition in a neutral cycle where reasonably possible
4) districts are reasonably compact
5) county/town splits are kept small and reasonable (exceptions are New England where counties don’t really matter, and large counties/towns where it’s kind of silly to require that they be fully within one district)

[cvparty]

I would rather switch compactness and representativeness. Otherwise, the list looks good enough, albeit we should edit number 4 to be "small and reasonable and as few as is sensible"

alright that sounds good I’ll change it, but “small and reasonable and as few as is sensible” is very redundant

[cvparty]

So what state do we want to start with?

we could do ME —> work southwest toward CA
or
smallest —> largest

[cvparty]

OKAY let me make a grand description of the process including y’all’s suggestions gimme a few minutes
alsooo @jimrtrex I‘m pretty neutral, I really try to make fair maps, but I‘d agree to be removed if I prove to be v unpopular and partisan (this goes for anyone I suppose, but especially me cuz I’m the independent)

[cvparty]

I guess I'll make the thread? And we'll start with Maine and work our way toward CA (save NY, FL, TX, and CA for last). But first we need another panel member, decide whether to follow VRA (personally I say no), and approve the rules I made below. NOW IS THE TIME TO PUT FORWARD ANY SUGGESTIONS

The panel

• Singletxguyforfun (R)
• LimoLiberal (R)
• cvparty (I)
• Ted Bessell (D)
• TimTurner (D)

*Panelists can be removed if there is considerable opposition and/or evidence of unfairness

State order
ME - NH - MA - RI - CT - NJ - PA - MD - VA - NC - SC - GA - WV - OH - MI - IN - KY - IL - WI - MN - IA - MO - AR - TN - AL - MS - LA - TX - OK - KS - NE - CO - NM - AZ - NV - UT - ID - WA - OR - HI - NY - FL - TX - CA
*You have the entire order here, so try to stay ahead and have maps in advance.

Map selection
1) Submissions are open for 2 days for each state (may be extended for populous states); anyone can post a map proposal

• Two proposals allowed per person—DO NOT POST MORE THAN TWO MAPS. If you do, only the first two you post will be eligible.

2) Each panelist chooses 2 maps - at least one of the choices must be a map that is not their own. (They are free to not submit a map at all and to select 2 others' plans.)

• Panelists must choose in secret by PMing me their choices (to avoid outside influences—votes will be made public afterward)

3) First round: The committee votes whether to approve each of the maps (3/5 votes needed for a pass; there must be at least one D and one R vote)
4) Second round: The remaining maps are ranked à la instant runoff and the most popular map wins

Criteria for maps
★ REQUIRED ★
1) All maps are to be made with DRA
2) PVI data must be provided, and the drf file must be available at hand to verify
3) Districts must be contiguous (water contiguity is allowed, but the areas should be connected by something like a bridge or ferry)
4) Populations must be provided; maximum allowed deviation is 0.5%
★ GOALS FOR EVALUATION ★
1) Each district's constituents are geographically, demographically, and politically similar (i.e. rural vs. urban, race, metro areas, voting)
2) The districts are generally representative of the state's partisan composition in a neutral election cycle, where reasonably possible (proportions need not be exact; states like Massachusetts and Oklahoma are understandable—just don't pull an NCGOP)
3) Districts are reasonably compact

• It is understood that compactness is not the best measure of fairness or gerrymandering; just no strange and unfair slivers and branches

4) County and especially town splits are kept small and reasonable

• Special cases are small states with large populations [e.g. there is more leeway for NJ, which has 9,000,000 people in only 21 counties vs. MS, which has 3,000,000 in 82)
• and large counties/towns [e.g. in Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh and Delaware County])

[cvparty]

Yeah we can do both. I like that idea, it seems a bit more real. So right now we have myself as the republican, LimoLiberal and TimTurner as the Dems, CVparty as the Indy, and muon, you wanna be the other Rep?

This is your thread to do what you like with, and as a mod I've been one of his biggest defenders, but.... LimoLiberal as a Dem? Are you really sure you want to do that? He's admitted he was concern trolling in December.

yeah i noticed too a lot of people said no to limo...so if another person is preferred to be the democrat that should be changed

[cvparty]

What happens if the panel is unable to secure 3 votes for any map, with one Pub and one Dem voting for it?

I suppose any map with just 3/5 would pass then
and if no map that anyone created is considered fair by 3/5...well there's probably a problem in one of the panel members

[cvparty]

How do I post my map here? I have the screenshot and PVIs ready, but I can't copy it from my desktop. I'm on mac.

upload it to an image hosting site or the gallery https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?action=gallery

also I'll keep you as the Democrat I'm not sure about what the others want though

[cvparty]

lol guys don't post maps until the panel is complete and the rules are finalized, I'm going to make a new megathread for all the states when we officially start anyway

[cvparty]

lol guys don't post maps until the panel is complete and the rules are finalized, I'm going to make a new megathread for all the states when we officially start anyway

Gotcha. I have my Maine saved so I’ll be ready for that. What’re we missing on the panel rn? Just one more republican?

yes, also we need to make decisions on VRA and the submission time frame (I currently have it at 2 days but whatever y'all want)

[cvparty]

We should either not have VRA for purpose of this exercise, or have it be a factor that is deemphasized, but still be present.

I feel like considering the safeguards that the other factors already impose and the advantage VRA creates for the GOP, it's not really necessary. plus I think this project is meant to be quick so it'd also be cumbersome if we had it. I do have in the rules that districts' constituents should be demographically similar

You will need Muon2's advice on VRA matters sometimes, and that process might delay matters. Two days is tight with that element in play.

two days is just for map submission, the selection will take another couple days

[cvparty]

Another thing I’d propose is to PM the maps to one person who can then post all of them on a thread with a poll for the other members to discus and vote on and if there isn’t a majority vote on the best map the decision gets kicked back to the 5 panel members who would draw a compromise map

mm, I do think we'll be able to agree on at least one map for each state though. and we should start by monday morning, but we still need one more panel member...honestly they can be either a D or R and we can just have Limo be the opposite, I'm sure he'll understand lolz

[cvparty]

To add to rule questions, how much weight is given to keeping counties intact in New England? CT has no county government, but ME does. Is chopping a New England town a greater penalty than chopping a county there?

Here's another. All other criteria equal, SCOTUS says that the plan with less population inequality rules. Does that apply here?

I would say yes to preserving Maine's, but really just town lines for Connecticut. I guess the whole New England thing is more about most of them being populous but geographically small states with few counties. For example Massachusetts has nearly 7,000,000 people packed in only 14 counties. And New Jersey (another small state) has 9,000,000 in 21. Making the CDs strictly follow county lines is not the best idea for those kinds of states, hence county lines being lower than compactness and representativeness in priority. There's a lot more leeway there, than say, Mississippi, which has 3,000,000 in 82. The focus for the small but populous states is really on town lines.

And I don't think we are applying that rule, the population deviation is just a requirement. The .5% is low enough that the differences aren't significant.

[cvparty]

I see that cvparty says there is an open spot on the panel -- is this still the case? If so, I would be interested in taking it.

yeet I'm assuming you'll be the Democrat? we shall commence Monday with Maine then (I still think we need another day to sort things out)

[cvparty]

I much prefer for two plans to be permitted per panelist, not just one.

I will take that as a proposed amendment that can be voted on by the panel. To be clear - you are drawing a distinction between the number of plans a panelist can submit compared to the number from other posters. This is not about the step when plans are put into the final pool for voting.

I don't have an opinion on how many plans other posters can submit, not yet anyway. But I think the way we have been moving so far suggests two is the maximum a panelist can submit, not one.

The thing is that if we let the panelists submit two maps, then they'll likely use their two choices on their own maps. I wanted more say from the public in the maps while keeping the flow relatively quick. If we increase the number of choices, then we get too many maps (this whole thing could take a year or something). The goal here is to create a plan with fair and similar districts. And considering that focus, when it comes down to choosing between two maps that one likes, I believe there is probably one you can choose that is ultimately the better fit.

[cvparty]

are we doing this tomorrow or no lol

[cvparty]

I tried to move it along by giving the panel something to practice on earlier today - the panel rules. None have even voted on them yet, and the only two who commented on them didn't agree. I'm not sure if you all want any organization to your panel and submissions.

yeah I really appreciate that but only two of us have actually responded...

[cvparty]

I tried to move it along by giving the panel something to practice on earlier today - the panel rules. None have even voted on them yet, and the only two who commented on them didn't agree. I'm not sure if you all want any organization to your panel and submissions.

yeah I really appreciate that but only two of us have actually responded...

I've run one of these panels before and GMed a couple Diplomacy games on the Election and History Games board here. If only two people respond the day after the panel formed I'm not optimistic that a state every other day is going to work for you.

We *could* wait another/a few more days...or we could just go ahead and do a little sort of run with Maine tomorrow. I think everyone said the rules were good/sufficient. It's a simple 2-CD state anyway it's not like we're running headfirst into California...if we run into problems we can go back and revise

[cvparty]

I tried to move it along by giving the panel something to practice on earlier today - the panel rules. None have even voted on them yet, and the only two who commented on them didn't agree. I'm not sure if you all want any organization to your panel and submissions.

yeah I really appreciate that but only two of us have actually responded...

I've run one of these panels before and GMed a couple Diplomacy games on the Election and History Games board here. If only two people respond the day after the panel formed I'm not optimistic that a state every other day is going to work for you.

We *could* wait another/a few more days...or we could just go ahead and do a little sort of run with Maine tomorrow. I think everyone said the rules were good/sufficient. It's a simple 2-CD state anyway it's not like we're running headfirst into California...if we run into problems we can go back and revise

In that case I wouldn't start a new thread. You have a bunch of ME plans already on this one. Just identify them by name so commissioners can vote.

well I'd prefer to just start clean so there are clear rules that are easily found in the OP, plus there was a lot said in this thread before Maine came up. I'd link the plans that appeared in this thread in the new thread

[cvparty]

jimrtex and TimTurner, we'll go with 2 allowed submissions for now, but if it becomes too much we should scale it down again. the map just needs to be made with DRA, you can even submit it as an interactive google map if ya know how to do that, but you do need to have the file available so we can open it in DRA. and yes we will have the listed criteria as factors in evaluation, but you are free to explain your map with a narrative and that will be considered.

[cvparty]

It might carry weight which map is more exact if the maps otherwise tie, but whatever. And you might be right, that there is no voting district that takes in parts (slices, dices, bits, pieces, fragments) of two towns (are you sure?). But the participants will have to figure out digging out the town maps, which voting districts chop a town, and which do not (see map below where one town (South Oxford) is split into two voting districts, with one voting district therein also taking in another town (Stoneham) to confuse matters further). Good luck with that. The voting district numbers give no clue as to whether a split is involved or not.

All the town shapes are pretty square so you could probably use intuition and see the town lines. I figure it's not ridiculously difficult to look up "maine's towns map." Actually, you can just click a NE county in the 2016 election results on this site to see the towns with voting info

also, to anyone seeing this thread, here is the official thread for map submissions and discussions

[cvparty]

Perhaps you could provide a link to where one finds all these town maps.

here click the state, then the county and you have the towns

[cvparty]

Perhaps you could provide a link to where one finds all these town maps.

here click the state, then the county and you have the towns

This is so much fun. I see that part of South Oxford has morphed into something called "Albany UT" (what is a UT?), with the balance split into two bits that are greyed out. So a poster puts up a map that has Albany UT in one CD (let's assume that the voting district takes in only the geography of Albany UT for purposes of this hypothetical (it doesn't quite actually, but maybe that is Leips being a tad sloppy with the lines) and the grey bits in another, and a competing poster after the deadline, points out the chop digging out the real town maps, rather than the inaccurate ones on the Leips site.

UT is unorganized territory. South Oxford is a UT. Albany Township, Mason Township, and Batchelder's Grant are the three areas that comprise South Oxford. So it really doesn't matter if you decided to keep all three in the same district or not, you're not splitting a town. I think Leip's lines are fine

[cvparty]

and you can't split south oxford in DRA anyway...