US House Redistricting: Pennsylvania

[muon2]

I don't know if this was noticed before, but the seven SE counties are almost exactly the size of 7 CDs.

My (2nd and 3rd) maps on page 15 use that.

Very good. I assume that if I want to sustain the deviation greater than 1 in those districts, I need to show that I had followed a dictum to keep as many whole counties or districts within a county as possible. Hence our differences in how to split those seven counties. Other than Philly and Montco which must have splits after creating as many districts entirely within, I only split Chester.

In the meantime I've completed the rest of the state based on the principle of county integrity.

I found that six districts fit almost exactly in the western half of the state, plus Tioga and Bradford, form six districts with a deficit of only 372 persons total. Allegheny and Butler together are within 0.3% of two districts. The other four districts are each within 1.4% of the ideal population if rounded to whole counties. Other than Allegheny, only two counties are divided to bring the districts to with 100 persons. As in the SE no more than one township is divided between any two districts.

The remaining five districts in the east would be within 2.8% of the ideal size if rounded to whole counties. Three of the districts (11, 15, and 17) are within 0.9%. Three counties are divided to bring these five districts to with 100 persons, and only one county subdivision is split between any two districts. CD 10 isn't very pretty, but both CD 11 and 15 are very close to exact with the three counties that make up each district and the western division constrains the rest of CD 10.



For those interested in the political breakdown - here are the 2008 stats:

CD 1: Obama 89.9% - 9.7%
CD 2: Obama 79.7% - 19.7%
CD 3: Obama 51.0% - 47.6%
CD 4: McCain 54.9% - 44.1%
CD 5: McCain 55.1% - 43.9%
CD 6: Obama 53.5% - 45.3%
CD 7: Obama 61.4% - 37.7%
CD 8: Obama 53.7% - 45.2%
CD 9: McCain 58.6% - 40.3%
CD 10: McCain 55.7% - 43.0%
CD 11: Obama 57.6% - 41.4%
CD 12: McCain 56.2% - 42.5%
CD 13: Obama 58.8% - 40.3%
CD 14: Obama 64.0% - 35.0%
CD 15: Obama 55.2% - 44.8%
CD 16: McCain 52.1% - 47.1%
CD 17: McCain 53.3% - 45.6%
CD 18: McCain 54.0% - 44.7%

[Sbane]

Is it likely a CD-16 like this will be drawn? It seems to make all the other districts much easier to hold for the Republicans, and looks fairly nice. In addition to a Dem pack which goes in and takes in the most Democratic parts of Delaware and Montco, that is what the Republicans need to do to keep their gains. The 16th as I have drawn it is about 50.7-48.3 Mccain  and the average is 57.6-42.4 Republican.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Pitts lives in Chester, so no. It'll probably be just Lancaster and southern Chester.

[RBH]

Inspired by this quote (Map is a work in progress)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

CD10 (pink): 59.5/39.2 McCain (63/37 Rep) - was 54/45 McCain
CD11 (lime): 52.7/46.1 McCain (56/44 Rep) - was 57/42 Obama
CD15 (orange): 55.4/43.3 Obama (54/46 Dem) - was 56/43 Obama
CD17 (blueish): 60.3/38.6 Obama (59.5/40.5 Dem) - was 51/48 McCain

I'm guessing that 5 and 9 will be pushed west and that the 12th district will be moved to the current location of CD19

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The pattern looks like a fantasy geological map of some kind.

[RBH]

not to mention it'd be a district where Holden could be primaried fairly easily

[Torie]

Based on the maps of Muon2 and sbane in part, here is another iteration of a non partisan plan which I suspect will be hard to criticize much.  And just as the Philly metro CD's PA 01, 02, 06, 07, 08 and 16 all almost perfectly fit within a cohort of counties, so too, PA-03, 04, 14 and 18 similarly fit in a series of counties on the western side of the state as it happens, in both instances with less than a one precinct error.

[Verily]

There are still a few issues. I don't like that you split the obvious community of interest between Greene and Fayette Counties. Similarly, Beaver County goes well with Washington County or with points north, but not really with Pittsburgh suburbia or Butler County exurbia. In general, that area needs to be reworked.

Also, splitting up coal country is a bad idea. Schuylkill-Columbia-Montour-Northumberland is a pretty clear community of interest, while connecting Dauphin to Schuylkill is artificial and just a continuation of an old gerrymander (not that the Dems could win any nongerrymandered district containing Dauphin--this is a COI determination, not a partisan one).

Finally, I think the towns peeled off from the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre district should be the really rural ones in NW Luzerne rather than the fairly developed ones in NE Lackawanna, but that's a small quibble. There might also be some unnecessarily split townships in MontCo?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Does Lackawanna-Luzerne-Carbon-Schuylkill equal a district, roughly? Because if so, it's an obvious one to draw, almost as a starting point.

[Bacon King]

Does Lackawanna-Luzerne-Carbon-Schuylkill equal a district, roughly? Because if so, it's an obvious one to draw, almost as a starting point.

Fairly close-ish: 43k over ideal population

[Torie]

You guys seem now to be going for county splits to give the Dems a few odd extra basis points. The alternative to the way I drew PA-17 are worse. Dauphin has to go somewhere. I thought about it. So, I don't find any of it compelling. The split in Lackawanna by the way involves next to no people. It's irrelevant, and done for compactness reasons. Three precincts are involved. Whatever.  

What will actually come down will make my map seem like a wet dream to you anyway. I think this is the map God would draw. So that is that. Cheers.

The thing is, is that it seems absent a Dem gerry, the natural flow is not all that different from a GOP gerry. Interesting.

Finally, I might add, that this redistricting process is so emotional, so much is at stake, it's so partisan, and based on my experience on this very site, and the comments, objectivity is almost impossible to achieve. There are just too many semi plausible cover stories to doing anything, that one one has a lot of plausible deniability to just being a partisan hack, so one is just so tempted.  Very few have the personal discipline to just say no. Sobering. It has actually influenced me in how I might structure a redistricting mechanism. Finding an objective panel is laughable. There is no such thing. Even here, we seem to mostly revert to matter how hard we try, to partisan games, sometimes disingenuously.

[RBH]

My first version of this map (which I posted part of last night) was lost in an accident. So I recreated it and went statewide. So here's the map titled "vindictive Republican gerrymander"

Statewide:






PA1 (Brady): 43% White, 34% Black, 12% Hispanic, 8% Asian. Obama 76, McCain 23 (was 90/10 Obama). Dems 77, Reps 23.


PA2 (Fattah): 61% Black, 18% White, 14% Hispanic. Obama 94, McCain 5.5 (was 88/12 Obama). Dems 92, Reps 8


PA3 (Kelly): 91% White. Obama 50, McCain 48.5 (was 49/49). Reps 50.2, Dems 49.8


PA4 (Altmire): 93% White. McCain 56, Obama 43 (was 55/44 McCain). Reps 54, Dems 46


PA5 (Thompson v. Critz?): 94% White. McCain 53, Obama 45 (was 55/44 McCain). Reps 53, Dems 47


PA6 (Gerlach): 84% White, 7% Hispanic. Obama 51, McCain 48 (was 58/41 Obama). Reps 53, Dems 47


PA7 (Meehan): 83% White, 7% Black. Obama 54, McCain 45 (was 56/43 Obama). Dems 50.4, Reps 49.6


PA8 (Fitzpatrick): 87% White. Obama 53, McCain 46 (was 54/45 Obama). Dems 51, Reps 49


PA9 (Shuster v. Critz?): 94% White. McCain 61, Obama 38 (was 63/35 McCain). Reps 60, Dems 40


PA10 (Marino): 94% White. McCain 60, Obama 38 (was 54/45 McCain). Reps 63, Dems 37.


PA11 (Barletta): 84.5% White, 7% Hispanic, 5% Black. McCain 51, Obama 48 (was 58/41 Obama). Reps 54.5, Dems 45.5


PA12 (Platts): 87% White, 5% Hispanic. McCain 57, Obama 42 (PA19 was 56/43 McCain). Reps 62, Dems 38


PA13 (Schwartz): 73% White, 13% Black, 6.5% Asian. Obama 65, McCain 34 (was 59/41 Obama). Dems 63.5/Reps 36.5


PA14 (Doyle): 71.5% White, 21.5% Black. Obama 69, McCain 29.5 (was 70/29 Obama). Dems 72, Reps 28


PA15 (Dent): 77% White, 14% Hispanic. Obama 56, McCain 43 (was 56/43 Obama). Dems 54, Reps 46


PA16 (Pitts): 80% White, 12% Hispanic. McCain 51, Obama 48.5 (was 51/48 McCain). Reps 57, Dems 43


PA17 (Holden): 82.5% White, 8% Black, 6.5% Hispanic. Obama 60, McCain 39 (was 51/48 McCain). Dems 59, Reps 41


PA18 (Murphy): 94% White. McCain 53.5, Obama 45.5 (was 55/44 McCain). Dems 51, Reps 49.

totals

McCain: 8
Obama: 10

Rep Avg: 9
Dem Avg: 9



Rep incumbents in Obama seats: 5
Rep incumbents in Obama seats who see the Obama percentage go down: 3

Alleghany County:


Beaver County:


Chester County:


Delaware County and Philadelphia:


Fayette County:


Johnstown:


Montgomery County


Reading:


I'm sensing 9 could go into Greene County, moving the top counties of 9 to 5, moving 18 into Beaver, moving 3 into the top part of 5.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Here's another Republican map of PA:




PA-01 (blue, Bob Brady - D) - 83.3 Obama, 16.1 McCain, 82.3 D avg; 44.0% white, 40.8% black VAP
PA-02 (green, Chaka Fattah - D) - 91.4 Obama, 8.3 McCain, 89.8 D avg; 53.9% black VAP
PA-03 (purple, Mike Kelly - R) - 50.6 McCain, 48.1 Obama, 52.5 R avg
PA-04 (red, Jason Altmire - D and Mark Critz - D) - 54.7 McCain, 44.2 Obama, 51.9 R avg
PA-05 (yellow, Glenn Thompson - R) - 56.8 McCain, 42.0 Obama, 58.8 R avg
PA-06 (teal, Jim Gerlach - R) - 53.0 Obama, 45.8 McCain, 50.5 R avg
PA-07 (grey, Patrick Meehan - R) - 53.2 Obama, 45.9 McCain, 50.3 R avg
PA-08 (light purple, Mike Fitzpatrick - R) - 53.3 Obama, 45.6 McCain, 51.9 D avg
PA-09 (sky blue, Bill Shuster - R) - 56.8 McCain, 41.9 Obama, 53.3 R avg
PA-10 (magenta, Tom Marino - R) - 55.4 McCain, 43.3 Obama, 58.7 R avg
PA-11 (light green, Lou Barletta - R) - 55.1 McCain, 43.7 Obama, 57.3 R avg
PA-12 (light purple, Todd Platts - R, formerly PA-19) - 56.8 McCain, 42.1 Obama, 61.9 R avg
PA-13 (pink, Allyson Schwartz - D) - 65.0 Obama, 34.2 McCain, 62.6 D avg
PA-14 (brown, Mike Doyle - D) - 68.2 Obama, 30.8 McCain, 70.0 D avg
PA-15 (orange, Charlie Dent - R) - 54.9 Obama, 43.8 McCain, 53.4 D avg
PA-16 (light green, Joe Pitts - R) - 52.8 McCain, 46.3 Obama, 59.6 R avg
PA-17 (purple, Tim Holden - D) - 60.7 Obama, 38.2 McCain, 58.9 D avg
PA-18 (yellow, Tim Murphy - R) - 54.8 McCain, 44.2 Obama, 50.4 R avg

[muon2]

I liked Torie's observation that four districts fit neatly into the western counties. Together they have a deficit of 1,266 people from the ideal. That is within 0.5% and has been allowed by SCOTUS, so I'll use that as a basis elsewhere. I did stick to my plan to keep Butler and Allegheny as two districts since together they are less than 1% off and can be divided to keep each within 0.4% of ideal. That leaves Beaver as the only split county in the west, and should better satisfy Verily's concern.

The SE has a surplus 67 people for the seven districts. I prefer to keep as many whole districts within a large county as possible, so I left my split of Montgomery as before. I did make some minor adjustments to avoid any township split while using up to a 0.5% variation. As before only Chester is the only county under one district to be split. Philly is unchanged from my previous plan which leaves three ward splits there with CD 1 at 51.0% BVAP.

I was able to create a NE grouping of counties that were only 126 persons over the ideal size for three districts. The answer to Al is that Lackawanna and Luzerne would be too big with Carbon and Schuylkill, but match up almost perfectly with Monroe to make one district, short by only 491 persons. Carbon is just slightly too big for Lehigh and Northhampton and was split along township lines to keep CD 10 and 15 both within 0.1%.

The remaining area in the center has four districts and only 1073 extra persons. Two whole groupings of counties can be made into single districts staying less than 0.3% over the ideal size. The remaining area splits only Huntingdon to complete the map with CD 5 and 9 with 0.3% of the ideal size.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

But Monroe doesn't fit from a community of interest perspective.

[dpmapper]

But Monroe doesn't fit from a community of interest perspective.

Monroe doesn't fit with much of anything from a CoI perspective.  Gotta put it somewhere...

Also, splitting up coal country is a bad idea. Schuylkill-Columbia-Montour-Northumberland is a pretty clear community of interest, while connecting Dauphin to Schuylkill is artificial and just a continuation of an old gerrymander (not that the Dems could win any nongerrymandered district containing Dauphin--this is a COI determination, not a partisan one).

"Coal country" only extends really to the southern tips of Columbia and Northumberland; most of those counties are hilly farms and Susquehanna river towns, more related to (say) Union County, I would think. 

[Verily]

But Monroe doesn't fit from a community of interest perspective.

Monroe doesn't fit with much of anything from a CoI perspective.  Gotta put it somewhere...

Also, splitting up coal country is a bad idea. Schuylkill-Columbia-Montour-Northumberland is a pretty clear community of interest, while connecting Dauphin to Schuylkill is artificial and just a continuation of an old gerrymander (not that the Dems could win any nongerrymandered district containing Dauphin--this is a COI determination, not a partisan one).

"Coal country" only extends really to the southern tips of Columbia and Northumberland; most of those counties are hilly farms and Susquehanna river towns, more related to (say) Union County, I would think.  

No reason not to combine that four-county grouping with the other rural areas as well. Sort of like muon's map, except with Northumberland in the NE district and Clinton and Potter in the North-Central district.

I have some other misgivings with muon's map as well (notably, again, in the SW--I'd rather split Westmoreland than separate Greene and Fayette, as eastern and western Westmoreland have not much in common but Greene and Fayette might as well be the same county), but it does fix some of Torie's problems. I like Torie's design of PA-15 and PA-11, and also his internal split of Allegheny County, better than muon's, though.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

What does everyone think of this district? It's one of my dream districts, obviously wouldn't ever happen without a Democratic gerrymander, but it'd be so awesome if it did:

[TJ in Oregon]

What does everyone think of this district? It's one of my dream districts, obviously wouldn't ever happen without a Democratic gerrymander, but it'd be so awesome if it did:

That manages to chop Lancaster in half and split apart York while taking pieces of five different counties and combining pieces of Lancaster and York. If you could just find a way to put part of Bucks County in there you could break every PA "rule"

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Well the point is to get the cities of York and Lancaster together along with Reading and the Democratic territory around it, and I tacked on Pottstown and the area just south of it for also nearby Democratic votes. It's a 56% Obama district drawn entirely out of areas currently represented by Republicans.

[Torie]

Well the point is to get the cities of York and Lancaster together along with Reading and the Democratic territory around it, and I tacked on Pottstown and the area just south of it for also nearby Democratic votes. It's a 56% Obama district drawn entirely out of areas currently represented by Republicans.

[minionofmidas]

You guys seem now to be going for county splits to give the Dems a few odd extra basis points. The alternative to the way I drew PA-17 are worse. Dauphin has to go somewhere.

Yes - the 17th needs to be built around Dauphin and Cumberland.

[muon2]

But Monroe doesn't fit from a community of interest perspective.

Monroe doesn't fit with much of anything from a CoI perspective.  Gotta put it somewhere...

Also, splitting up coal country is a bad idea. Schuylkill-Columbia-Montour-Northumberland is a pretty clear community of interest, while connecting Dauphin to Schuylkill is artificial and just a continuation of an old gerrymander (not that the Dems could win any nongerrymandered district containing Dauphin--this is a COI determination, not a partisan one).

"Coal country" only extends really to the southern tips of Columbia and Northumberland; most of those counties are hilly farms and Susquehanna river towns, more related to (say) Union County, I would think.  

No reason not to combine that four-county grouping with the other rural areas as well. Sort of like muon's map, except with Northumberland in the NE district and Clinton and Potter in the North-Central district.

I have some other misgivings with muon's map as well (notably, again, in the SW--I'd rather split Westmoreland than separate Greene and Fayette, as eastern and western Westmoreland have not much in common but Greene and Fayette might as well be the same county), but it does fix some of Torie's problems. I like Torie's design of PA-15 and PA-11, and also his internal split of Allegheny County, better than muon's, though.

Monroe is hard to place from a CoI standpoint. It's exurban NYC as much as anything else. I thought my PA-15 and PA-11 were essentially the same as Torie's. The slight boundary shift is due to my attempt to elevate county boundaries as a more important criteria when practical.

I would note that the northern tier of counties now has more in common with the Schuylkill coal fields than a decade ago. Bradford and Tioga are huge areas of shale gas drilling today, so the mineral industry dominates much of the PA-10 I drew.

It seemed to me that the split of Allegheny that you like also created the attachment of Beaver to Butler that you didn't like. I treated Beaver the way you suggested. I think you need an additional CD in SW PA to simultaneously meet your objectives. Unfortunately, that's where the population losses were.

[Verily]

Maybe we're misunderstanding each other. I just don't like the Pittsburgh district going all the way to the Washington and Westmoreland County lines.

Anyway, it occurs to me that the Lehigh Valley also has a fair number of NYC commuters. Not a lot, but enough that putting Stroudsburg in PA-15 would probably be reasonable. The rest of Monroe still has to go with Scranton/Wilkes-Barre (along with Carbon County), but rural Monroe is not any different from rural Carbon, really.

[muon2]

Maybe we're misunderstanding each other. I just don't like the Pittsburgh district going all the way to the Washington and Westmoreland County lines.

So I think I understand that you would prefer a three-way split of Allegheny. The southern part of Allegheny would go with Fayette, Greene, and Washington. The northern part would go with Butler and Armstrong. You didn't seem to like Beaver with Butler; is putting it with Washington, etc. OK?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I understand that, I was trying to understand why you thought Torie's was better, when it seemed much the same as mine.