Fair redistricting: New York

[cvparty]

Hello, Atlas, and welcome to our fair redistricting project! We will be creating fair and representative congressional districts through a bipartisan panel of me (I), Singletxguyforfun (R), Sol (R), OPEN (D), and TimTurner (D). It is essential that you read the rules at the bottom of this post.

Status

Submissions are OPEN until 6/20, 8:00 AM EST! Feel free to submit up to TWO maps maximum, add a narrative/explanation to your map, and give feedback on other people's maps!

State order and directory
ME - NH - RI - CT - MA - NJ - MD - VA - WV - PA - NY
*You have the entire order here, so try to stay ahead and have maps in advance.






Map selection
1) Submissions are open usually 3 days for each state (may be extended for populous states, and shortened for small ones); 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) After submissions close, 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.)

• Open discussion of plans is encouraged, but panelists must cast their actual votes by PMing me their choices

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
• If not one map can pass here somehow, a simple 3/5 will be sufficient

4) Second round: The remaining maps are ranked by Condorcet method and the most popular map wins

• Stages 2 and 3 may be skipped if the number of submissions is low enough

Criteria for maps
★ REQUIRED ★
1) All maps are to be made with DRA
2) PVI data must be provided, and you must have your drf file ready 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%
★ FACTORS IN EVALUATION ★
1) Each district's constituents are generally similar geographically, demographically, and politically (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 much 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]

★RESULTS SPREADSHEET★

~maps to come~

[cvparty]

Existing Maine maps
TimTurner's map

ME-01: D+6.94, -195
ME-02: R+0.94, +196

Singletxguyforfun's map

Torie's map

LimoLiberal's map

Kevinstat's map
Kevinstat's other map

jimrtex's map

[cvparty]

Just bumping this up. Anyone who wants to submit their version of Maine has until 8 am tomorrow morning to do so. If you would like to vote on previous submissions, please PM cvparty. You can vote for your 2 favorites

clarification—panelists will PM me their choices for their two favorite maps after map submissions close tomorrow (08:00 EST)

[cvparty]

THIS IS SOLID4096'S MAP. Its D+7/R+1 and the deviation is 195

hmm it's the exact same as TimTurner's map so let's just lump them together
also there's only like 2 ways to draw Maine so this state won't be very exciting

[cvparty]

aw jimrtex ma dude I’m sorry it was 08:00 military time...all the Maine maps are basically the same anyway...

LIMO AND TED GODDAMN WHERE ARE THEE
they may have to be replaced if they‘re not responsive. let me know if you would consider being a D or R panelist

[cvparty]

The panelists have made their choices...! Now's our first round of voting; six maps made it.

Panelists, copy the list as follows and vote YES or NO to moving the maps to the final round. Do add comments for explanation if possible. Consider compactness, representativeness, constituent similarity, and to a lesser extent, splits (really just towns for this state; please do not be fanatical about counties). A "no" vote is not necessarily saying the map in question is bad, just that in context of the goal and the other maps you wouldn't recommend it for the final round. Hyperlinks are provided for reference. I vote:

Starpaul20 - Y
Torie - Y
Singletxguyforfun - Y
TimTurner et al. - Y
muon - N
LimoLiberal - N

LimoLiberal's is just kinda funky in its shape. muon's is fine, but imo Sagadahoc is better suited for ME-01 than Franklin and Oxford (particularly their northern, sparsely populated areas)

[cvparty]

For like 80% or so states, I will attempt to submit a fair map, but some for a few states, I am going to submit gerrymanders.

umm please don’t...it’s kinda discourteous considering the explicitly stated purpose of this thread. sort of like king lear trolling in a predictions thread...why not make a new topic

[cvparty]

All the yes ones all look more or less the same and Uon is right about southern oxford and southern franklin

I know I was really talking about the northern parts. I especially like Starpaul20’s way of executing the split. muon’s map isn’t bad but I want to narrow down the maps for the final round

[cvparty]

But virtually nobody lives in the northern parts of Oxford and Franklin, though they are certainly larger by area. Are you suggesting that to curry your vote on future states we should favor the interests of the larger proportion of geographical area rather than the larger proportion of population in a county?

That's what I'm generally saying, I think those areas are more similar to the rural, inner ME-02 than coastal, urban ME-01. I mean, in retrospect I prob should've approved it bc the first round should be just to weed out maps that are obviously unfit. It passed anyway though. I would probably rank the other maps above it though. So no, I would probably approve future maps, but rank them lower.

I suggest that Condorcet be used. Each panel member ranks the proposals, just like under IRV (all proposals must be ranked). You then calculate the pairwise preference for each combination of two proposals. (e.g. how many panelists prefer proposal A to proposal B, and vice versa). The proposal that has more support is considered the "winner" for that pair. You can keep standings, and the proposal with the best record wins. This will help out a proposal that is everyone's second choice, but nobody's first choice, which is eliminated under IRV.

maybe, I'll see about it

[cvparty]

We are now in the second and final round for Maine! All maps made it except Limo's. Panelists, please clearly rank the five maps from best to least best. CONSIDER FACTORS of compactness, similarity, partisan breakdown, and splits. Once again, links are provided. This is my ranking (coincidentally the original order):
1. Starpaul20
2. Torie
3. Singletxguyforfun
4. TimTurner et al.
5. muon

[cvparty]

When can we submit our NH maps?

as soon as limo and ted vote and I calculate and announce the winning map! (hopefully today)

I wonder how often we will have a case where 3 different people all submit the same map.

probably often, esp. for small states

1. Muon
2. TimTurner et al
3. Singletxguyforfun
4. Torie
5. Starpaul20

interesting your order is the exact opposite of mine lol, do you mind explaining your vote? just curious

[cvparty]

By Condorcet vote, Torie's map is the winner! Feel free to run and verify the calculations.

With Maine finished, New Hampshire submissions are now OPEN! Refer to status details and rules in the OP.

[cvparty]

This is basically a compact urban-rural scheme, with the densely populated southeast in the second district. I made this map very carefully from looking election maps, trend maps, and population distribution maps
PVI is D+0.92 and R+0.98, so v competitive for both
also, anyone who separates Dover and Portsmouth is a MONSTER (jk)

[cvparty]

I find it bothersome that of the 5 maps that made it to the final round for Maine, the winning map was the map (and the only map) that had more than 1000 population deviation, which I believe should be a hard cap at what is allowed.

0.005 deviation is rather negligible compared with the other goals

[cvparty]

We’re getting some variety this time unlike in Maine. I can’t wait to see what some of the bigger states will look like. Also, I’m gonna start an MS paint file featuring the winning maps for each state, just to see if our bipartisan and fair maps look better on a national scale

hey pm me the national map after each state and i’ll put it in the op

[cvparty]

For reference and to help y'all group communities with similar interests, here's also a map of NH's town trends in the 2016 election, you can see a pretty clear strip of pink in the southeast

[cvparty]

One of the criteria is that towns be not merely contiguous, but also connected.

It is?

Also, *update* New Hampshire submissions will only be open for one day instead of two (we pretty much already have all the possible schemes); this will probably go for most small states. Rhode Island and Connecticut have also moved ahead of Massachusetts in the state order now.

[cvparty]

When you suggested that contiguity by water required a bridge, I suggested that contiguity by land should have a road, too, and no one objected.

I don't remember that lol

If I might suggest, you should swap the town of Epping (Rockingham) with the town of Lee (Strafford). It doesn't change the shape of your districts in a meaningful way and it reduces the deviation from 1966 to 115. It's the sort of detail that matters in court challenges, too.

I agree about Portsmouth and Dover. There's a reason that Rockingham and Strafford are in the same UCC. Though I would add Rochester to that pair, since it's more attached to Dover economically than Dover is to Portsmouth.

All maps have Dover in the seacoast region with Portsmouth, but only sometimes for Rochester. Also, Rochester swung hard R last election while Dover trended D, much like the Portsmouth region and Nashua suburbs. I would include Rochester in the 1st but there are just too many people in the southeast to include in the district...I figured putting Rochester in the 2nd would make the most sense if I had to leave out a part of the southeast

[cvparty]

You're not the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

nor does this thread have any practical implications...

I happened to have finished my NH map, and decided to go ahead and submit it today. But I might not have and would have missed out.

24 hours is honestly enough time for a smol 2-district state. I always have the current status easily accessible in the OP. there aren't many ways to draw NH; we already have pretty much every viable plan and we need to move quickly. the point is that one is supposed to have these maps ready to submit, not wait until the deadline is imminent each time to make the map. this was specified in the OP. of course, there will be 2+ days for bigger/average states

[cvparty]

I don't see what honesty has to do with it. You announced a deadline, then changed it to a day earlier. As I noted, I had drawn the map two days before the deadline, and had even transcribed it to the DRA Paint Program. I don't ordinarily re-read the first message in a thread, as it will lose the place marker for new messages, and this will become increasingly unlikely as other states are added.

I suggested a way of handling multiple states at once.

That was the deadline I had at the time, I never said "this is the definite deadline which cannot be subject to change." We are still in the early stages so yes things will change (you may read the rules less as time goes on, which actually should be fine bc less changes will be made as the project stabilizes. although I don't see the hassle in looking at the OP status). Unfortunately a number of the panelists are not so responsive such that we can finish in the time desired and know when a state will end, so set dates would just keep changing. I'd rather not have several threads because it would get messy and confusing. I really appreciate the concern and input, I did implement the Condorcet suggestion; apologies for the deadline change, but as I said we're still in the early stages. I don't think it was a big deal considering the circumstances but I will be careful in the future.

[cvparty]

is it possible I could join this?

in what way?

[cvparty]

Was my plan graded?

no, muon probably missed you cuz you just put a link

[cvparty]

ok, great, what state are we doing right now?

NH, status and details are always in the op

[cvparty]

ok, great, what state are we doing right now?

NH, status and details are always in the op

oh sorry
can I get the next state so I can start working on it?

the state order is also in the OP ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) next is RI, then CT, refer to OP to see the rest. I recommend making as many maps as you can in advance to stay ahead