2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan

[Former President tack50]

Not sure how likely the commission is to draw a map like this but here is my attempt.



It somehow ended up as quite a Republican gerrymander (even if I did not look at partisan data and tried to generally keep counties whole). However most of the R leads are quite small. Only 4 districts are decided by more than 11 points. So it can also work as an R dummymander maybe.

Also, this map keeps 2 VRA districts in Detroit, at 53 and 48% black VAP

[Former President tack50]

I decided to give this a try with a fair map and uh, here is what I got. Not really a fair map in terms of partisan outcome but the COIs seem reasonable?



https://davesredistricting.org/join/9ed5b836-c557-4f51-ad5e-6c9199cf8098

MI-01: Trump+22, R+10 (Safe R)
MI-02: Trump+22, R+10 (Safe R)
MI-03: Trump+9, R+7 (Likely R)
MI-04: Trump+19, R+7 (Safe R)
MI-05: Trump+11, R+3 (Likely R)
MI-06: Trump+6, R+2 (Lean R)
MI-07: Clinton+8, D+4 (Likely D)
MI-08: Trump+4, R+2 (Tossup)
MI-09: Clinton+3, EVEN (Tossup)
MI-10: Trump+19, R+7 (Safe R)
MI-11: Trump+0, D+2 (Tossup)
MI-12: Clinton+58, D+29, 51% Black CVAP (Safe D)
MI-13: Clinton+52, D+28, 51% Black CVAP (Safe D)

4 Safe R
2 Likely R
1 Lean R
3 Tossup
1 Likely D
2 Safe D

For the sake of completeness, I will say that in the Governor race Whitmer gets all the Clinton districts plus the 5th (Flint), the 6th (Kalamazoo), the 8th (Lansing) and the 11th (Southern Detroit); getting in fact a majority of districts in the process (8/13)

However, Stabenow does not get a majority of districts as she only flipped the 11th and the 8th (for a total of 6/13)

[Former President tack50]

For fun decided to try and make a fair State senate map:



Detroit area inset:


https://davesredistricting.org/join/e7e3428a-47d3-490a-88b2-f6bde8043a81

Per DRA, there should be 18 Republican districts, 11 Democratic districts and 8 competitive districts.

The tipping point districts would be:

Dem majority: District 34 (Muskegon area): Trump+10, R+3
Tie: District 13 (Southeast Macomb County); Trump+9, R+2
Rep majority: District 22 (Saginaw area): Trump+7, R+2

So basically this map would make the state senate likely R, but not 100% safe

[Former President tack50]

Not VRA compliant.

Do I need to make a second AA seat in Detroit?

Bit of a bummer, I was surprised that Detroit could be fit into a nice, neat district. I suppose it can be rearranged without really changing the outcome of the map though.

What qualifies as VRA compliant? I was able to make both Detroit CDs around 45% black. Should I shoot for 50?


The east Detroit is now down to 50% Black and the West Wayne is now 42% Black. DRA has minority rating at 98.

You can definitely get over 50% pretty easily and compactly. It does require dipping into Southfield and Pontiac, and you do have to do a little careful work to avoid splitting municipalities, but it's very doable.

Does going from 42 to 50% warrant another split of Oakland? I saw all of the Black population in South Oakland but I have an existing district with basically all of incorporated Oakland in it. Counties are pretty arbitrary political boundaries, but I don't like how Wayne/Washtenaw/Macomb/Oakland are all carved up in weird ways in the actual House map.

I do think 42% Black is enough to elect a representative of their choice consistently. They make up over 60% of the Dem electorate in each.

Given you have 2 black districts you could go for 2 districts at 46% black as well instead of one at 42 and one at 50.

I also agree with TPH that in this particular case the COI based map would keep Detroit in a single district. But over all 50 states the effects of the VRA probably cancel out.

[Former President tack50]

It's not like Detroit's boundaries (and when they stopped expanding) was a development that grew up entirely separately from class and race-based discrimination.

Wayne County is supermajorty Democratic, so wouldn't they be free to redraw municipal boundaries as they saw fit?

If it has to be done by the state government it is harder, but still certainly doable?

Tbh I will say that one problem the US have is that the municipal boundaries in many cases are ridiculous and can and should be ignored in those cases where the municipal lines have tons of enclaves and exclaves and are impossible to follow, but Detroit seems to me like it has fairly clean lines.

This is an example of why the VRA is stupid and goes against the whole idea of fair redistricting which is to put communities of interest together. From a fair standpoint it makes sense to make Detroit one district because it fits nicely and a city is a perfect COI but no we can't do that because it packs blacks so instead we have to spread them out through the suburbs to make sure we can get two black districts.

Representation for ethnic groups > arbitrary municipal lines.

Not really, the point of FPTP is to represent communities, not ethnic groups. If the US really wanted to represent ethnic groups, they should go with different alternatives like for example party list PR (and making sure X % of candidates are from Y group); or making sure that parties must nominate X% of candidates from Y ethnic group; with Z% being in districts they won last election or something.

Of course that also requires dismantling primaries as Americans know them, with a "party decides" model (like say, the UK or Canada do)

I will say that I still oppose repealing that provision of the VRA and that in Detroit's particular case it is not too bad and there are much worse examples you can make for that (for example FL-05).

[Former President tack50]

I will also note that in Michigan's particular case, the VRA either has no impact, or actually hurts Democrats by turning what should be a safe seat into a swingy seat. Here are 3 maps of the Detroit metropolitan area that illustrate this:

Non-VRA compliant map with a Detroit district



MI-01: Clinton+81, D+41 (74% black)
MI-02: Clinton+14, D+9
MI-03: Clinton+15, D+8
MI-04: Trump+7, R+1
MI-05: Clinton+20, D+8
MI-06: Trump+20, R+10



VRA semi-compliant map with a Detroit split



MI-01: Clinton+50, D+27 (48% black)
MI-02: Clinton+39, D+19 (43% black)
MI-03: Clinton+15, D+8
MI-04: Trump+7, R+1
MI-05: Clinton+20, D+8
MI-06: Trump+20, R+10


Fully VRA compliant map with maxed out black districts



MI-01: Clinton+51, D+24 (48% black)
MI-02: Clinton+51, D+26 (50% black)
MI-03: Clinton+15, D+8
MI-04: Trump+7, R+1
MI-05: Clinton+9, D+2
MI-06: Trump+20, R+10

So interestingly, it is the 2nd map that is the best for Dems, but the difference is incredibly marginal, it's not like the 2nd district in the first map is anything other than Safe D. A D+9, Clinton+14 district is probably not winnable for a Republican; not even in a big wave?

Meanwhile, when you try to max out black percentages you end up endangering the 5th district. It is still quite Democratic (and probably trending D) but it's not exactly safe.

[Former President tack50]

For fun, here is my guess for a bipartisan incumbent protection plan; the kind that could have been drawn if there was no comission. I did this hoping that, for the most part, trends would stick. Admittedly this is a version that is quite favourable to Dems, but still it does its job for "incumbent protection" though I think some of the R representatives get screwed so not ideal for them.

Names indicate the representative the district is intended for, the one whose home is inside the district. Since Michigan is losing a district, 2 representatives will have to share one.



https://davesredistricting.org/join/6982f03d-e958-4756-94a9-7f078b471b0e

MI-01 (Bergman): Trump+23, R+10
MI-02 (Huizenga): Trump+12, R+6
MI-03 (Moolenar): Trump+10, R+4
MI-04 (Meljer + Kildee): Trump+1, EVEN
MI-05 (Upton): Trump+18, R+9
MI-06 (Walberg): Trump+18, R+8
MI-07 (Slotkin): Clinton+3, D+1
MI-08 (Levin): Clinton+6, D+5
MI-09 (McClain): Trump+32, R+12
MI-10 (Stevens): Clinton+1, EVEN
MI-11 (Dingell): Clinton+15, D+10
MI-12 (Tlaib): Clinton+52, D+28 (49% black)
MI-13 (Lawrence): Clinton+40, D+19 (47% black)

My thoughts in terms of the changes were basically that the successor to Amash, with low seniority and in a D trending area, should be combined with the MI-05 district, in an R trending area and which is a D gerrymander. This creates a perfectly fair fight district that is EVEN in PVI and voted Trump by only 1%.

The 2 Dems that won in 2018 get versions that are more democratic than their current versions, though they are still plenty winable for Republicans.

As for the rest I just took the residences and tried to make safe districts out of them that resembled their old district. Tbh the Grand Rapids area gets completely screwed in this map with a 4 way cut, and the 2 resulting districts aren't the greatest or the safest but it is good enough I suppose. Like I said the map is probably a bid Dem leaning.