Iowa-style Redistricting (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 28, 2024, 03:01:56 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Iowa-style Redistricting (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Iowa-style Redistricting  (Read 3955 times)
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


« on: April 01, 2012, 12:36:49 AM »

Nebraska:



District 1: Deviation -240; 44.6% Obama.
District 2: Deviation 59; 48.6% Obama.
District 3: Deviation 182; 28.0% Obama.

Aesthetically, I'd prefer a District 2 which takes in most of Sarpy instead of going north; it would do a better job of keeping the Omaha MSA together than this plan does.
Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


« Reply #1 on: April 06, 2012, 05:52:31 PM »

If you loosen the requirements just a tiny bit- up the deviation, split counties which are larger than a CD- then you can almost do this with Indiana:



1: -3498
2: -361
3: 2185
4: -719
5: 2176
6: 1097
7: 992
8: -50
9: -1818

It may be possible to lower the deviation on CD 1 if you're willing to get really ugly, and sacrifice that beautiful CD 8.  Really, the whole map looks freakishly clean, save the jigsaw boundary between 4 and 5.
Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


« Reply #2 on: April 06, 2012, 08:44:09 PM »
« Edited: April 06, 2012, 08:56:02 PM by traininthedistance »

Maine is technically possible, just squeaking in under the 1% threshold:



Deviations 5889 and 5890.

Obviously in New England it makes more sense to do things by town line than county line; counties aren't that important and you can be much more precise.  Maine is the only New England state where this is even theoretically possible, though.

I'd argue that keeping whole municipalities together at the expense of a couple more county splits is also the right policy in PA, NY, and NJ.  Counties do still have some power here in the Mid-Atlantic, but these three states have no unincorporated areas, or even any survey townships; municipalities hold most of the power.  And many of the counties are large enough that frequent splitting is unavoidable anyway.

...

Tried South Carolina, pretty sure it's impossible mainly due to Greenville and Spartanburg.
Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2012, 01:45:10 PM »

From this one can also estimate how many counties one should need to expect whole county redistricting to have a range of less than 1%. That limit is about 8.3 counties per district. With fewer counties, the model would predict a range in excess of 7000 or about 1% of an ideal district. The above ME example is a case in point, since it has only 8 counties per CD and has a range just over 1%.

Doh, I was thinking "range" was just the highest deviation for some reason.  That'll teach me to read better.
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 0.019 seconds with 11 queries.