2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan

[ProgressiveModerate]

The big questions around MI will be if Grand Rapids gets it's own district and if Ann Arbor is placed with Detroit and rurals.

My guess is the commission tries to create a lot of competative districts, something which is very doable in MI. MI geography sucks for Ds so I hope Ann Arbor isn't packed with downtown Detroit.



Here's my attempt. I think 7-6 Biden is prolly the most fair map, but I really hope we'll see a lot of competative districts are gerrymandering elsewhere will likely make for a small House battleground

[ProgressiveModerate]

Ok this is interesting.

I feel like there's upsides for both sides. The upside for the GOP is it seems pretty unlikely MI-5 is going to be protected and at worst will be an R-leaning swing district but at best safe R. Furthermore, it seems like MI-6 is going to be protected which eliminates any chance of a Grand Rapids - Kalamazoo district to help things be partisansly proportionate.

The good news for Dems is that Ann-Arbor isn't packed into Detroit, meaning there's a very good chance MI-7 or it's equivalent went to Biden by a handy amount

I think people forget that MI-8 in it's current for is already kinda Lansing based district, albiet not the most objective one. A Lansing based district does not automatically mean a Biden district; this district will likely be marginal either way.

As another user pointed out "West" is kinda vague and leaves open to interpretation what will happen with Grand Rapids. However, with that being said, I don't think it's a coincidence that the "West" region is almost exactly the population for 2 districts.

Simillar to Lansing, a Grand Rapids based district doesn't automatically mean a Biden district; it's likely to be pretty marginal either way but with a good chance to become a more reliable district for Dems over the decade.

So in conclusion, seems like Dems will prolly get 4 Detroit area districts (1 of the 5 will prolly be an R-leaning one based in Macomb), and another Ann-Arbor district. Lansing and Grand Rapids will probably be swing districts. 6 will probably lean R, alongside whatever happens to MI-5 and the pandhandle, and the rest will; be pretty safe R.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Considering it was a random lottery and that often "Independents" aren't really Independent, the commission could easily lean a bit left or right, though it's hard to tell if this is the case rn based on available info.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Here's where the draft state maps stand:

https://twitter.com/iansandlerbowen/status/1429910545734438912
https://twitter.com/iansandlerbowen/status/1429898956960669705

Those maps are oddly satisfying

[ProgressiveModerate]

The Commission is going to start drawing Congressional districts today. Going to start in the UP/North before heading to the Southeast and Lansing areas.

Is there a way to watch this happen live, like with the Utah redistricting?

They should live stream it on YT. I’ll post a link if I see it.

Here’s a channel link: https://m.youtube.com/user/MichSoSOffice/featured

[ProgressiveModerate]

The Commission is going to start drawing Congressional districts today. Going to start in the UP/North before heading to the Southeast and Lansing areas.

Is there a way to watch this happen live, like with the Utah redistricting?

Link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jbrlWzWRYgg&list=PLeyRQ8IgEZlZnfTFzpSo-hJct7R3d8UjQ&index=1

[ProgressiveModerate]

Welp seems like they aren't gonna be drawing the districts today that's underwhelming lol.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Welp seems like they aren't gonna be drawing the districts today that's underwhelming lol.

Where are you getting that from? I have it playing while im doing my opening fall classes lol they voted to skip drawing districts in the eastern part of the state. They just drew the first district

Right now they're drawing the state Senate districts, not the US House districts.

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wm7TK2d_heQ

They drawing CDs right now

[ProgressiveModerate]

Does anyone know if how they drew Detroit is legal? To me, it looks like they packed black voters into one seat.

They were discussing it in the commission and it seems likely it’ll change and their districts “1 and 2” will swap some population. Ig they’re waiting for the input of some civil weights person

[ProgressiveModerate]

This map is god awful.

I was watching a bit of the map drawing and it def wasn't drawn with partisan intent, it more seems like they were clueless. They started in Detroit so district 1 and 2 had great implications for the rest of the map it seems.

[ProgressiveModerate]

So the four proposals that the commission released yesterday all look like total nightmares

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/michigan/first_proposal/

Map 4 isn't even contiguous, I don't know why they even put that out.

The other three might as well have been drawn by the Republican legislature (especially the first).  

They all pack Ann Arbor with the Detroit suburbs, put Levin in an unwinnable seat, most likely doom Kildee (although that's expected anyway), and give all the R incumbents safe seats (even Upton) except Meijer, whose in the Grand Rapids district.

The median seat in all three workable maps is at least R+5.3, where Biden won the state by 2.78%.  

If they pass the first map, Michigan could very well end up with a 9R-4D delegation in 2023.

Why are the worst maps of this cycle coming from two Ind Commission states (Michigan and Colorado)?

Honestly map 4 wouldn't be too bad if it weren't for the fact it weren't contiguous. I feel like technically from a COI standpoint Ann-Arbor fits better with white Detroit burbs but from a partisanship standpoint, "unpacking" the Detroit metro is the right thing to do.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Honestly I think Birch is the best. It achieves partisan fairness without doing anything weird in Western MI with Grand Rapids to make a Dem leaning district.

Overall I'm happy with the MIRC. At first as was hesitant because it seemed like they had no clue what they were doing but in the end they came up with 3 really viable maps without too much tension between the Ds and Rs in the process.

[ProgressiveModerate]

When is the Commission going to decide on a final map?

IIRC dec 21 but don’t quote me

[ProgressiveModerate]

One interesting thing to think about is that a decade ago the GOP gerrymander confined Detroit to 4 safe D seats. A decade later a fair map by the commission still only gives Detroit 4 D seats (though a 5th seat which is competitive). Even though the seat that doesn’t seem to have a successor is MI-02, the downtown Detroit seats in particular were way underpopulated by the end of the decade and had to expand. While one could say part of this phenomenon is due to Dem losses in Macomb, I’d argue Dem gains in Oakland more than cancel that out.

Looking back at old maps crazy to think how Detroit metro single-handedly got like 10 CDs. I mean just go on wiki and see how tiny the downtown Detroit districts were as recently as the 70s and 80s; between every decade there’s a clear loss in Detroit. It seems like Detroit isn’t shrinking as badly as it used to and the suburbs are actually growing enough to prolly sustain MI-11 so it won’t be badly underpopulated even if MI loses a seat next decade, but weird to think how on my lifetime Detroit may be down to only 2 CDs.

[ProgressiveModerate]

For reference here is the final map, with a DRA link:
https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::538b84c5-9d2a-402f-b5fd-b1b8320a6f01

(For the record, it is a little sad to see Meijer get put in a DEM-leaning seat. I liked him a lot. I hope he is able to hold on this year)

That doesn't appear to be the final map, and if it is, the numbers are wrong.

If it's not the final map it's at least very close. The new MI-03 is Biden + 8.47 according to my calculations. However, it only went to Peters by 2 and Stabenow by 3; Clinton won it by the skin of her teeth and it went to Romney pretty easily.

Overall it's a seat that seems to still be a tossup downballot but is swinging hard D

[ProgressiveModerate]

Fun fact; Obama '08 won every district except MI-09 which ig isn't too suprising but still just awes me.

Also, according to my calculations, every district would be underpopulated today if they existed in the prior decade if that makes sense; only 3 and 12 came close to holding their ground

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2022/03/29/black-residents-challenge-metro-detroit-redistricting-maps-federal-court/7202491001/?gnt-cfr=1

Federal lawsuit over Michigan legislative maps.

That won't go anywhere, unless ir cut down compact gingles protected black performing districts, which I strongly doubt.

Tbf the commission went kinda hard on unpacking Detroit and bacon stripped many black areas pretty far out. 2022 will be a test to see how many of the districts perform.

Really though the legislative maps are gross, especially since there are easier ways to achieve relative equality. I'd say the CD map is prolly one of the best in the nation though.

[ProgressiveModerate]

(Bumping a very old thread - I know, I'm sorry!)

Competitive map I came up with for MI:  https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::10f6b431-05bf-43fa-ad0d-3ec99eddd423. 3 Safe R seats, 3 Safe D seats, and 7 (yes, 7) very competitive seats (the election I used was the 2020 presidential race). Just quickly skimming through their 2020 and 2016 presidential voting (plus the 2020 Senate race to compare where Biden over and unperformed Peters):

District: 2020-PRES, 2020-SEN (2016-PRES)
1: Biden+2.2; James+3.3 (Trump+5.3)
2: Trump+3.5; James+8.6 (Trump+9.0)
3: Trump+22.3; James+24.2 (Trump+24.1)
4: Biden+0.4; James+0.5 (Trump+2.0)
5: Trump+21.5; James+20.8 (Trump+24.6)
6: Biden+1.0; Peters+3.2 (Clinton+0.8)
7: Trump+26.3; James+24.5 (Trump+27.8)
8: Biden+1.1; James+1.0 (Trump+4.7)
9: Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5 (Trump+4.4)
10: Biden+2.4; Peters+1.1 (Clinton+0.5)
11: Biden+30.0; Peters+26.9 (Clinton+25.4)
12: Biden+15.9; Peters+16.9 (Clinton+11.9)
13: Biden+77.9; Peters+75.6 (Clinton+80.1)

Biden (D) won 8 districts in 2020; Trump (R) won 5.
James (R) won 7 districts in 2020; Peters (D) won 6.
Trump won 8 districts in 2020; Clinton (D) won 5.
And, surprising me, even Gretchen Whitmer (D) only won 8 districts in 2018. I'd have guessed she won 9 or perhaps even 10 (with 10 probably being a stretch).

You can see that generally, in Western MI, Biden did noticeably better than Gary Peters and Hillary Clinton, whereas in Eastern MI, there wasn't much of a difference. While Peters ran behind Biden throughout Western/Southwestern MI, in the eastern portion of the state, he tended to do better than Biden (in certain districts, at least - including the state's lone Peters/Trump district). And, of course, while Biden did much better than Clinton throughout suburban Southwest MI, in rural and urban MI, either Clinton did better than Biden, or Biden did only a little better than Clinton.

One novelty here IMO is MI08 and MI09. These are two seemingly very similar, purple districts in the Macomb/Oakland County area. However, interestingly, the 8th is a Biden-James district (Biden+1.1; James+1.0) while the 9th is the opposite - a Trump-Peters district (Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5)! I wonder why this is the case. (Of course, both the 8th and the 9th voted for Trump in 2016.)

The Detroit suburbs are really fascinating, and there's a pretty remarkable divide between Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb Counties. You can very clearly see the racial divide between Wayne and Oakland/Macomb counties where the black population experiences a very sudden dropoff from like 96% black precincts to majority white precincts. This divide has been fading the past few decades though.

Between Oakland and Macomb, you def have geopolitical and economic divide. Macomb County is a bit more stereotypical "white working-class suburbs" that have been shifting right under Trump but still have residual downballot D support, whereas Oakland is your stereotypical growing "well to do" white collar suburb that has been swinging left but has some residual down ballot R support. It's not so obvious on DRA, but on 2020 Pres numbers you can see a decently sharp political contrast, and on Google Maps you'll notice the communities in Oakland County have significantly more "greenery" than neighboring Macomb making the County line decently notable.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Interesting to see if this succeeds.

I really do not like the way the Commission tried to "unpack" black voters - however a very good handful of said seats failed in 2022. The commission argues it's what their VRA lawyers told them to do, but there def seemed to be some level of underlying partisan incentives.

The thing is in MI, you don't even have to excessively "unpack" black voters to make a partisan equitable map so that argument is weak as well. A lot of the map just "unpacks" black voters into already D-leaning suburbs.

Really hope these issues are fixed.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Interesting to see if this succeeds.

I really do not like the way the Commission tried to "unpack" black voters - however a very good handful of said seats failed in 2022. The commission argues it's what their VRA lawyers told them to do, but there def seemed to be some level of underlying partisan incentives.

The thing is in MI, you don't even have to excessively "unpack" black voters to make a partisan equitable map so that argument is weak as well. A lot of the map just "unpacks" black voters into already D-leaning suburbs.

Really hope these issues are fixed.

Yes, I think to be consistent with the principles laid out in the AL, LA, and now GA section 2 cases, the MI state senate map has to go.

Yeah especially the when it comes to the Senate districts. The thing to remember with this case is it effects the inner Detroit region, and therefore has nothing to do with partisanship. All the adjacent areas are varying hues of Blue. It instead has everything to do with the Dem Primary, and I would not be surprised if the commission's VRA analyst just didn't do that side of the equation. Because from a D v R perspective, all the districts they drew should function. But things in some of the seats don't work from a D v D primary RPV perspective.

I'm convinced the "VRA-lawyers" on the commission that had a heavy hand in the Detroit area had other motivations.

Overall I think the MI Commission was successful but having the same block of people doing all 3 maps lead to time crunches on the State House and State Senate maps leading to weird districts. Next time I would recommend there is just a separate slate of commissioners for each map that needs to be drawn.

[ProgressiveModerate]

It'll be interesting to see how SD-11 is changed.  It seems they want that southern little chunk taken out of it to increase the black population in neighboring districts (probably 10?).  

It'll become more R no matter what (it's losing most of the black population), but by how much is the real question.   If they just expand it north it probably becomes borderline safe R, if it just swaps territory with 10 it might stay at around Lean R or so.

SD-11 especially matters given how narrow Dems 20-18 majority is, and how many of the other State Senate seats they hold are quite narrow. Furthermore, Dems honestly don't have all that much room for growth in the State Senate, with SD-09 and SD-30 being the only two realistic pickups - maybe an outside chance at SD-32.