Re-Districting Information for Governors (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 03:16:49 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Re-Districting Information for Governors (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Re-Districting Information for Governors  (Read 9499 times)
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« on: November 12, 2004, 11:08:27 PM »

If I may make a suggestion to the Governor's....

Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2004, 11:13:54 PM »

Minor adjustments (added the states with no voters - SD, KS, and NE - to D3 to make it look better)


Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2004, 11:20:33 PM »

Virginia should never be in the same ranks as CT, RI, and PA.

And just out of curiousity, why should states like Ohio and West Viriginia be in the same ranks as CT and RI?
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2004, 11:32:17 PM »

Phil's plans and their variants don't pass Constitutional muster, if we use the current registerd population as our basis.  The western district under them has only 23 voters and the two northeastern districts have 28 and 27, making a spread of 5 votes between min and max.  There are 127 total voters by my count, and I can come up with several crazy looking but valid plans that have a difference of only 1 vote, so the max difference that is valid is 4 votes.  Put the prairie states (ND, SD, NE, KS) back into District 5 tho, and the plans are valid.

If I could correct the Governor, the western district has 24 voters, not 23. I don't know how much of a difference that makes but I thought that should be pointed out.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #4 on: November 12, 2004, 11:41:48 PM »

Ernest, can I have an exact quote from the Constitution that makes Phil's map illegal?


Second sentence of the redistricting amendment:
"The difference between the number of registered voters in any two districts shall be no more than three more than the minimum possible difference under constitutional rules."

Since a plan can be drawn that has a difference of one voter, and it is impossible with 127 voters to draw five equal districts of 25.4 voters, the minimum possible is 1.  Hence, the maximum possible is 1+3=4.

I've recounted, Phil, but I'm still getting only 23 voters in the western district if you remove ND.  If you could post how you're getting 24, I;d appreciate it.

My mistake. Without ND in the west, it is only 23. If we moved ND to the west, would my map be acceptable?
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #5 on: November 12, 2004, 11:47:12 PM »

The Keystone Phil Re-Districting Plan

Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,607


« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2004, 07:32:59 PM »
« Edited: November 13, 2004, 08:53:19 PM by Vice President Keystone Phil »


In all honesty (and I know Al still won't believe me but anyway...) I made up the map not knowing the exact makeup politically. If I wanted to gerrymander it, I would have added NC instead of DE, RI, and CT.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 10 queries.