1. Look at the actual results, *please*... this includes finding out how many congressmen is potentially competative districts had only paper opponents.
2. I don't see why this matters so much to you. Certainly computers make anything to do with maps easier, but the idea that you can't draw a gerrymander without computorised stuff is idiotic.
$400,000 worth of computational power for the 2002 redistricting would have been an unfeasable amount of computation power for the 1982 redistricting.
You can analyze the data more quickly, but you had people in both parties that could basically do the same things in their heads in 1982, or with just a little help from pencil, paper, and pocket calculator. I would argue that the 1982 PA-4 was a far worse gerrymander than anything out there now in PA.
I also disagree with the idea that it's solely political. It was possible in 1982 and 2002 to have created a GOP district largely from Westmoreland, Somerset, and parts of Cambria Counties (probably running into Bedford and Indiana Counties). Both times, the GOP legislature used this to knock off an incumbent Democrat, but both times they could have used it to knock off two incumbents and elect a Republican in the place of one.
Basically, the plans, both times, were used to protect John Murtha (D-12). In 1982, he was part of the majority party, close to the Speaker, and was more senior than his opponent (Don Bailey). In 2002, he was about two decades senior to his opponent (Frank Mascara) and now the ranking Democrat on several committees. The GOP legislature did not want to lose that clout in DC in either case.
There are other motives in the politician's mind than raw numbers of House members when they re-district.
Poll
