Re-Districting Information for Governors

[Platypus]

District 1 (NY, PA): 26
District 2 (MN, WI, MI, IL, IN, OH, WV, KY, VA): 25
District 3 (ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NJ, DE, MD, DC): 24
District 4 (FL, GA, SC, NC, TN, AR, LA, MS, AL, TX, OK, NM, AZ): 27
District 5 (AK, HI, WA, OR, CA, NV, ID, MT, WY, UT, CO, ND, SD, NE, KS, MO, IA): 25

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Right now, I'd vote against that plan and abstain on a variant that put Tennessee or North Carolina in District 3 instead..

[Platypus]

Your opinion is not biased against the Union party at all, is it Governor?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

No.  Considering that I have been having talks about possibly joining that party if a certain platform plank is revised, I certainly am not acting with a bias against the Union Party.  My concern is making certain that the primary district of the Southeastern Region is not overpopulated.  A 27 voter District 4 is too full.  27 or 28 voter Districts 1 or 2 in the Northeast are quite acceptible to me. ☺
EDIT: And with King's move District 4 is now even fuller, but it does add a move of Arizona to District 5 among the options that would cause me to abstain.

[minionofmidas]

Just to throw something in:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

25 or 26 voters each unless I miscounted, and only one partisan gerrymander (my own state )
Of course, NY and PA are one district and all those other blue states another one.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Question: will the new map (whichever is picked) be in use for the next Senate elections?

[Peter]

Yes it will. Assuming of course that we get done by then. I'm not really sure what happens if we don't.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

However, any special elections will use the map by which the seat that was vacated used, even if we have adopted another map by then.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

With redistricting every four months now, I feel like it is more important than ever to make adjustments to the existing map, rather than drawing new maps from scratch.  It's bad enough that Senators have to run in a different district in every election; we should make this as easy as possible for them while keeping the populations even.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If your goal is a map that requires moving the fewest states to be constitutional, then this is it:

  The only changes are that Pennsylvannia goes from District 1 to District 2 and Virginia goes from District 4 to District 1.

[Keystone Phil]

If I may make a suggestion to the Governor's....

[King]

If I may make a suggestion to the Governor's....

Oooh! I like that one.

[Keystone Phil]

Minor adjustments (added the states with no voters - SD, KS, and NE - to D3 to make it look better)

[King]

A small adjustment to Phil's



Virginia should never be in the same ranks as CT, RI, and PA.

[Keystone Phil]

Virginia should never be in the same ranks as CT, RI, and PA.

And just out of curiousity, why should states like Ohio and West Viriginia be in the same ranks as CT and RI?

[King]

Virginia should never be in the same ranks as CT, RI, and PA.

And just out of curiousity, why should states like Ohio and West Viriginia be in the same ranks as CT and RI?

Because that way, all the states are Union states.

[King]

If we were to use my map:

D1 = 28
D2 = 26
D3 = 25
D4 = 24
D5 = 23

Not bad, not bad at all.

At least the map makes sense.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Phil's plans and their variants don't pass Constitutional muster, if we use the current registerd population as our basis.  The western district under them has only 23 voters and the two northeastern districts have 28 and 27, making a spread of 5 votes between min and max.  There are 127 total voters by my count, and I can come up with several crazy looking but valid plans that have a difference of only 1 vote, so the max difference that is valid is 4 votes.  Put the prairie states (ND, SD, NE, KS) back into District 5 tho, and the plans are valid.

[Keystone Phil]

Phil's plans and their variants don't pass Constitutional muster, if we use the current registerd population as our basis.  The western district under them has only 23 voters and the two northeastern districts have 28 and 27, making a spread of 5 votes between min and max.  There are 127 total voters by my count, and I can come up with several crazy looking but valid plans that have a difference of only 1 vote, so the max difference that is valid is 4 votes.  Put the prairie states (ND, SD, NE, KS) back into District 5 tho, and the plans are valid.

If I could correct the Governor, the western district has 24 voters, not 23. I don't know how much of a difference that makes but I thought that should be pointed out.

[King]

Ernest, can I have an exact quote from the Constitution that makes Phil's map illegal?

[Josh/Devilman88]

If I may make a suggestion to the Governor's....

Oooh! I like that one.

i dont

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Ernest, can I have an exact quote from the Constitution that makes Phil's map illegal?

Second sentence of the redistricting amendment:
"The difference between the number of registered voters in any two districts shall be no more than three more than the minimum possible difference under constitutional rules."

Since a plan can be drawn that has a difference of one voter, and it is impossible with 127 voters to draw five equal districts of 25.4 voters, the minimum possible is 1.  Hence, the maximum possible is 1+3=4.

I've recounted, Phil, but I'm still getting only 23 voters in the western district if you remove ND.  If you could post how you're getting 24, I;d appreciate it.

[Keystone Phil]

Ernest, can I have an exact quote from the Constitution that makes Phil's map illegal?

Second sentence of the redistricting amendment:
"The difference between the number of registered voters in any two districts shall be no more than three more than the minimum possible difference under constitutional rules."

Since a plan can be drawn that has a difference of one voter, and it is impossible with 127 voters to draw five equal districts of 25.4 voters, the minimum possible is 1.  Hence, the maximum possible is 1+3=4.

I've recounted, Phil, but I'm still getting only 23 voters in the western district if you remove ND.  If you could post how you're getting 24, I;d appreciate it.

My mistake. Without ND in the west, it is only 23. If we moved ND to the west, would my map be acceptable?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Acceptable, that's to be seen; but constitutionally valid, yes.

[Keystone Phil]

The Keystone Phil Re-Districting Plan