VRA will not be used.
Maximum compactness. Keep densely-populated areas intact whenever possible. Take no information into account except those two considerations.
I approve!
I like this.
Me too. And i absolutely dislike VRA. IMHO - Democrats in the South lost 2-3 districts to ultraconservative Republicans for each VRA-district, being it in House or state legislatures. And an example of Mississippi's legislative district, which elected Black Democrat in 2007 (SD-04), and almost reelected him in 2011 whole neing about 95% white, on one side, and number of congressional examples (Ellison and Cleaver are routinely reelected in 65% whote districts, while Steve Cohen just as easily wins 64% Black district) show me that good candidate can win almost everywhere. After all, not especially "racially progressive" South Carolina elects black Senator, and Utah (where LDS church discriminated blacks until 1970th) elects black woman to House. "Artificial means" usually bring more harm, then good, even when initial intention were noble.
P.S. Note that i am even more strongly oppose ANY gerrymandering, so "Republicans could gerrymander districts so there would be no Blacks elected from the South" will not convince me in this matter. If
I would be a drawer - no such gerrymandering would be possible, and first 2 criteria for me would be compactness (i hate "tentacles" in many present districts) and COI...