rpryor03's Parliamentary America

[rpryor03]

My new project!

 Alabama   10
 Alaska   2
 Arizona   14
 Arkansas   6
 California   79
 Colorado   11
 Connecticut   7
 Delaware   2
 Florida   41
 Georgia   21
 Hawaii   3
 Idaho   3
 Illinois   26
 Indiana   13
 Iowa   6
 Kansas   6
 Kentucky   9
 Louisiana   9
 Maine   3
 Maryland   12
 Massachusetts   14
 Michigan   20
 Minnesota   11
 Mississippi   6
 Missouri   12
 Montana   2
 Nebraska   4
 Nevada   6
 New Hampshire   3
 New Jersey   18
 New Mexico   4
 New York   40
 North Carolina   20
 North Dakota   2
 Ohio   24
 Oklahoma   8
 Oregon   8
 Pennsylvania   26
 Rhode Island   2
 South Carolina   10
 South Dakota   2
 Tennessee   13
 Texas   55
 Utah   6
 Vermont   1
 Virginia   17
 Washington   14
 West Virginia   4
 Wisconsin   12
 Wyoming   1

[muon2]

What determined the number of seats, and do you have any ground rules for the size and composition of the districts?

[rpryor03]

What determined the number of seats, and do you have any ground rules for the size and composition of the districts?

The total amount of seats is 650, the size of the British House of Commons. The size is gonna be around 490,000 per seat. Composition, I think I'll try to make some minority districts, but I'm looking at the Tanner Rule for the composition.

[muon2]

Do you have a link for the Tanner Rule?

[jimrtex]

Do you have a link for the Tanner Rule?

This maybe.

John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act

[Torie]

Do you have a link for the Tanner Rule?

This maybe.

John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act

It's better than the mess of a statute that was proposed for Illinois, that has parameters so vague, including communities of interest, as to be close to worthless. I was very disappointed in the proposed Illinois statute. This one I notices punts on the matter of how to measure erosity, which I guess is understandable given all the back and forth and disagreements we have had on that issue, and never really fully resolving it.

[muon2]

Do you have a link for the Tanner Rule?

This maybe.

John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act

It's better than the mess of a statute that was proposed for Illinois, that has parameters so vague, including communities of interest, as to be close to worthless. I was very disappointed in the proposed Illinois statute. This one I notices punts on the matter of how to measure erosity, which I guess is understandable given all the back and forth and disagreements we have had on that issue, and never really fully resolving it.

Yes the problem with writing the IL redistricting amendment is that there are lots of interest groups that want to be part of it. Each one has their idea of what should be important, and few if any have any technical background on strict criteria. Anything other than loose criteria like CoI would have driven some of the partners to oppose the effort since they'd be suspicious that a specific condition might be designed to favor a particular group.

I see in the Tanner Act that they require continuity of counties, etc., but fail to say if "maintenance of geographic continuity" means fewest split geographic units or fewest chops of geographic units.

[Torie]

Do you have a link for the Tanner Rule?

This maybe.

John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act

It's better than the mess of a statute that was proposed for Illinois, that has parameters so vague, including communities of interest, as to be close to worthless. I was very disappointed in the proposed Illinois statute. This one I notices punts on the matter of how to measure erosity, which I guess is understandable given all the back and forth and disagreements we have had on that issue, and never really fully resolving it.

Yes the problem with writing the IL redistricting amendment is that there are lots of interest groups that want to be part of it. Each one has their idea of what should be important, and few if any have any technical background on strict criteria. Anything other than loose criteria like CoI would have driven some of the partners to oppose the effort since they'd be suspicious that a specific condition might be designed to favor a particular group.

I see in the Tanner Act that they require continuity of counties, etc., but fail to say if "maintenance of geographic continuity" means fewest split geographic units or fewest chops of geographic units.

Yes, but I interpret maintenance of continuity of counties, and municipal jurisdictions, as meaning a regime of chop minimization. We have sort of developed our own vocabulary around here, that has not seeped across the Fruited Plain as yet.

[jimrtex]

Do you have a link for the Tanner Rule?

This maybe.

John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act

It's better than the mess of a statute that was proposed for Illinois, that has parameters so vague, including communities of interest, as to be close to worthless. I was very disappointed in the proposed Illinois statute. This one I notices punts on the matter of how to measure erosity, which I guess is understandable given all the back and forth and disagreements we have had on that issue, and never really fully resolving it.

Yes the problem with writing the IL redistricting amendment is that there are lots of interest groups that want to be part of it. Each one has their idea of what should be important, and few if any have any technical background on strict criteria. Anything other than loose criteria like CoI would have driven some of the partners to oppose the effort since they'd be suspicious that a specific condition might be designed to favor a particular group.

I see in the Tanner Act that they require continuity of counties, etc., but fail to say if "maintenance of geographic continuity" means fewest split geographic units or fewest chops of geographic units.

It's trying to be all things to all people.

It demands both mathematical equality, and "continuity" of geographical units.  It permits creation of competitive districts, even though that requires consideration of electoral results.

It has the same sort of composition problem that exists in Arizona, where the chair can effectively exercise complete control.

It requires a plan to be submitted to the legislature for approval, but appears to permit multiple plans to be submitted to the state supreme court.

[muon2]

Do you have a link for the Tanner Rule?

This maybe.

John Tanner Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act

It's better than the mess of a statute that was proposed for Illinois, that has parameters so vague, including communities of interest, as to be close to worthless. I was very disappointed in the proposed Illinois statute. This one I notices punts on the matter of how to measure erosity, which I guess is understandable given all the back and forth and disagreements we have had on that issue, and never really fully resolving it.

Yes the problem with writing the IL redistricting amendment is that there are lots of interest groups that want to be part of it. Each one has their idea of what should be important, and few if any have any technical background on strict criteria. Anything other than loose criteria like CoI would have driven some of the partners to oppose the effort since they'd be suspicious that a specific condition might be designed to favor a particular group.

I see in the Tanner Act that they require continuity of counties, etc., but fail to say if "maintenance of geographic continuity" means fewest split geographic units or fewest chops of geographic units.

It's trying to be all things to all people.

It demands both mathematical equality, and "continuity" of geographical units.  It permits creation of competitive districts, even though that requires consideration of electoral results.

It makes the error of assuming that barring political data causes people's minds to be erased of what they know about the politics of a state. Don't use the data explicitly, but don't bar it either.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's why I like the idea of a Pareto optimal set of plans that can go to both the legislature and if necessary the court.