US House Redistricting: Michigan

[Verily]

Two solidly Democratic black seats (one majority black VAP, the other plurality black VAP and majority black+Hispanic VAP).

One Democratic seat based on Ann Arbor and the traditionally Democratic southern Wayne suburbs and Monroe County, 62% Obama

One marginal seat containing the southern tier and Battle Creek and Kalamazoo, 52-45 Obama, would probably be Republican

One Republican-leaning seat on Lake Michigan, Benton Harbor-Holland-Muskegon, 49-49 McCain.

One Republican seat in Grand Rapids, contains the entire county plus the suburban spillover in Ottawa County and Ionia County, 47-50 McCain.

One Democratic-leaning seat in Lansing, containing the Lansing metro plus Jackson, 57-41 Obama.

One Republican seat in Livingston and the Oakland suburbs, plus part of Wayne County to balance things out, 45-52 McCain.

One Democratic seat in inner Oakland and Macomb counties, 64-34 Obama.

One Democratic-leaning marginal seat in mid-Oakland and Macomb counties, 55-43 Obama

One Republican seat in outer Macomb and the thumb, 47-50 McCain

One Democratic seat in Flint-Saginaw-Bay City (originally wanted to keep Flint separate, but this proved too unwieldy), 62-35 Obama

One Republican-leaning seat in the small cities of the upper LP (Midland, Isabella, Alpena; Alpena could be exchanged for Traverse City if desired) 51-47 Obama

One Republican-leaning seat in the UP and Traverse City, 50-48 Obama

6D-6R-2 in a state that was more Democratic than the nation is pretty generous to the Republicans, ultimately. Certainly this map does not favor the Democrats.

[Verily]

It makes sense if you are a Democrat since it restructures the outstate districts to eliminate a Republican seat in Western Michigan and replace it with a Democratic seat in Central Michigan.

It then maintains a 5-1_1/2 seat of seats in metro Detroit by created an outersuburban pack district to dump as many Republicans as possible. That might make sense to a Democrat.

It fails to cross Eightmile right to add Blacks to the two Detroit districts because they are underpopulated. Drawing districts that are 51% Black rather than 54%/56% might make sense if you are Democrat.


Crossing the Macomb/Oakland county line three times might make sense if you are a Democrat, but, it isn't within the rules.

If you are going to cut a black seat, as was done in that map, there is no more logical community of interest district than all the black areas of Detroit put together + the 2 cities inside.

The map doesn't cut a black seat. There are two black seats.

[Verily]

The map doesn't cut a black seat. There are two black seats.

one majority black VAP, the other plurality black VAP and majority black+Hispanic VAP

This is quite clearly retrogressing a black seat.

lolno. Not even the Supreme Court agrees with you.

[Verily]

The map doesn't cut a black seat. There are two black seats.

one majority black VAP, the other plurality black VAP and majority black+Hispanic VAP

This is quite clearly retrogressing a black seat.

lolno. Not even the Supreme Court agrees with you.

The definition of the wording is obvious, as are the numbers. But, go on drawing Democratic maps and describing them as 'fair', I won't stop you.

Okay, 6-6-2 in a lean-D state is totally a Democratic map.

[Verily]

I'd like to see krazen or BigSkyBob draw a map as to what they'd consider "fair", but they'll probably just argue that the current disgusting GOP gerrymander is a fair map.

A fair map would give the Democrats 6 districts; 1 in Flint/Saginaw, 1 in Detroit, 1 in Lower Oakland/Macomb, 1 in Wayne County, 1 in Washentaw/remainder of Wayne, and perhaps 1 in central Oakland. There is no other compelling strength of Democratic votes to guarantee them a 7th seat unless you decide to exclude extremely rational choices like attacking Ingram to neighboring Livingston County as was done in Debbie Stabenow's district.

The proposed maps include curious choices to needlessly reconfigure compact districts like the 6th that nicely sit in a corner of the state. Which are of course valid choices that adhere to municipal boundaries, but do not preclude the idea of other valid choices.

This is the sticking point--attaching Ingham and Livingston Counties to one another is not a rational choice. That's not a comment on whether it favors either party. (It would favor the Democrats to do so if the additional population thereafter were acquired from Eaton or Shiawassee County instead of outer Oakland County.) But they are completely and totally different in all ways; the fact that they are neighbors does not make connecting them reasonable or rational or intelligible for any reasons other than partisanship.

The same, of course, is true of connecting Washtenaw and Livingston (which you hypocritically aren't advocating, of course because it always favors the Democrats) or Gennessee to Livingston (again, no more unreasonable than connecting Ingham and Livingston, but also favors the Democrats). Livingston only reasonably connects to its fellow Detroit suburbs in Oakland and/or Wayne and the extreme NE corner of Washtenaw; it shares nothing in common with its other neighbors.

You fail to understand the basic meaning of "community of interest".

[Verily]

A "fair" map doesn't "give" either party seats.  A fair map would make as compact of districts as possible, minimizing county and municipality splits (in that order of importance) and let the chips fall where they do.

Sort of. Counties are arbitrary entities created in the 19th century that frequently bear little resemblance to actual communities of interest--witness Oakland County or Macomb County or Washtenaw County for areas in the same county that have little or nothing in common. Similar can be true of municipalities, although for the most part municipalities are small enough that they have homogenous characters and it is generally a good idea to respect municipal boundaries as a result.

Demographics should be the first and foremost determinator of communities of interest and fair districts, although county and municipal lines are sometimes useful indicators of demographic transitions (or useful benchmarks where the edge of a certain demographic region is unclear--e.g., the edge of the Saginaw metro is not obvious, but the borders of Saginaw county are a good proxy).