Fair redistricting: New York

[cvparty]

Could someone use DRA to get the PVI for a district comprised of:

Armstrong, Indiana, Jefferson, Clearfield, Centre, Huntingdon, Mifflin, Snyder, and Northumberland?

No matter what I do, it says R+51.54.

Alternatively, since it is comprised of whole counties, what is the formula for calculating PVI used by DRA?

are you using the right data set? the second option - "2010 voting districts," not "2010 voting districts (updated by the state)"

[cvparty]

Could someone use DRA to get the PVI for a district comprised of:

Armstrong, Indiana, Jefferson, Clearfield, Centre, Huntingdon, Mifflin, Snyder, and Northumberland?

No matter what I do, it says R+51.54.

Alternatively, since it is comprised of whole counties, what is the formula for calculating PVI used by DRA?

are you using the right data set? the second option - "2010 voting districts," not "2010 voting districts (updated by the state)"

Why is the second data set the "right" data set?

bc the precinct data for 2016 isn't matched correctly with the other ones. for example northampton+lehigh is like R+7 in the default set which is totally wrong

[cvparty]

Could someone use DRA to get the PVI for a district comprised of:

Armstrong, Indiana, Jefferson, Clearfield, Centre, Huntingdon, Mifflin, Snyder, and Northumberland?

No matter what I do, it says R+51.54.

Alternatively, since it is comprised of whole counties, what is the formula for calculating PVI used by DRA?

are you using the right data set? the second option - "2010 voting districts," not "2010 voting districts (updated by the state)"

Why is the second data set the "right" data set?

bc the precinct data for 2016 isn't matched correctly with the other ones. for example northampton+lehigh is like R+7 in the default set which is totally wrong

Are all of the states wrong, or just Pennsylvania?

just PA

[cvparty]

1st (Bucks county): R+0.87 | VAP white 87.7%
2nd (Cheltenham): D+19.20 | VAP white 68.4%
3rd (Philadelphia): D+37.86 | VAP white 30.5%
4th (Reading): D+2.31 | VAP white 77.6%
5th (west Philadelphia): D+27.92 | VAP white 44.6%
6th (Chester county): D+1.31 | VAP white 85.0%
7th (Allentown): D+0.78 | VAP white 79.5%
8th (Scranton): R+1.82 | VAP white 90.3%
9th (Harrisburg): R+8.66 | VAP white 84.2%
10th (York): R+13.60 | VAP white 90.0%
11th (Lancaster): R+12.56 | VAP white 88.6%
12th (Williamsport): R+18.13 | VAP white 93.9%
13th (Altoona): R+18.65 | VAP white 93.0%
14th (Westmoreland county): R+15.80 | VAP 95.0%
15th (Butler county): R+20.34 | VAP 96.4%
16th (Erie): R+4.94 | VAP 91.8%
17th (north Allegheny): D+6.88 | VAP 80.7%
18th (Washington county): D+1.55 | VAP 88.2%

whoa this map looks really similar to the map i’m gonna submit
I love what you did with Chester+western Delaware it makes so much sense and Reading+north Montco
I would move Pike and Wayne into the 8th tho
also Dauphin+Cumberland

[cvparty]

Jimrtex didn't post the populations of his CD's in his PA map, but I think they vary by more  than 1%. For example, it seems he has just two CD's filling in Bucks and Montco, which causes a greater variance. There are close to 14,000 too many people from the quota, about twice as many as would allow for just 2 CD's while staying within the population variance limit.

Jimrtex hasn't yet posted the population of his CD's.

Jimrtex will also produce county chop victimization report. I urge others to do the same.

hmm loaded language

[cvparty]

Jimrtex didn't post the populations of his CD's in his PA map, but I think they vary by more  than 1%. For example, it seems he has just two CD's filling in Bucks and Montco, which causes a greater variance. There are close to 14,000 too many people from the quota, about twice as many as would allow for just 2 CD's while staying within the population variance limit.

I have prepared a graphical presentation. Areas of circles are proportional to district population.

this...doesn't help

[cvparty]

Can you attempt to explain why you believe it does not contribute to understanding?

the populations are roughly the same size, so the circles look identical. you could have a district 5% outside the deviation and most people would not be able to see that from the circles. I think plain numbers would work better.

[cvparty]

1: D+6
2: D+11
3: D+39
4: D+1
5: D+27
6: D+2
7: EVEN
8: EVEN
9: R+15
10: R+6
11: R+14
12: R+15
13: R+24
14: R+14
15: R+20
16: R+8
17: R+2
18: D+12

[cvparty]

i dont know

[cvparty]

So therefore jimtrex's plan is invalid, as the maximum deviation (PA-3, -1.96%) is far in excess of the maximum deviation as set out under criteria 4: "Populations must be provided; maximum allowed deviation is 0.5%".

Is my plan invalid or are the rules invalid?

ok i'm sorry you don't like the rules but they are what they are
just split a municipality it's not the end of the world