US House Redistricting: Minnesota

[ilikeverin]

Possible configurations:

B) 4-3

1) Duluth-Northern Exurbs-St.Cloud
2) Western Minnesota - Manitoba to Iowa, with a somewhat irregular border.
3) Southeastern Minnesota.

This version exchanges St.Cloud for Brainerd and Bemidji.  Like the previous version this will require about 27,000 persons shifted from Sherburne to the metro area.

This one seems very nice!

[jimrtex]

Possible configurations:

B) 4-3

1) Duluth-Northern Exurbs-St.Cloud
2) Western Minnesota - Manitoba to Iowa, with a somewhat irregular border.
3) Southeastern Minnesota.

This shifts LeSueur to the south, and makes creates a clear Manitoba-Iowa district.  The metro area will need about 27,000 from Sherburne, Isanti, or Chisago (likely the SE corner of Sherburne).

If we are looking at these with an eye towards 2020, the growth will be predominantly in the TC metro. My projections are that Hennepin+Anoka will be about 43K larger than two CDs and Ramsey+Washington will be about 20K larger than a CD. The four counties that wrap from Wright to Dakota will be about 16K larger than a CD. Those metro counties will have to shed population to the rest of the state - most likely by moving Wright to St Cloud's district and running the south suburbs to Rice+.

I used the 2002 estimates.  The scenario was that the US had continuous reapportionment like is used in Australia, and that this reapportionment had been triggered by the shift of one representative from Minnesota to North Carolina. 

Of course, if this were Australia, they would base the new districts on projected growth.

There are 3 triggers used in Australia:

1) Change in apportionment for a State.
2) 1/3 of divisions with more than 10% deviation from ideal.
3) 7 years from previous distribution.

Districts must have a deviation of less than 10% at commencement, and a projected deviation of less than 3.5% in 3.5 years (midway through the ordinary cycle).

[krazen1211]

The Twin Cities are of course far smaller than a congressional district in 2020.

[jimrtex]

Possible configurations:

B) 4-3

1) Duluth-Northern Exurbs-St.Cloud
2) Western Minnesota - Manitoba to Iowa, with a somewhat irregular border.
3) Southeastern Minnesota.

This version exchanges St.Cloud for Brainerd and Bemidji.  Like the previous version this will require about 27,000 persons shifted from Sherburne to the metro area.

This one seems very nice!

Agreed.  If you don't want a Duluth-Grand Forks or Duluth-Fargo district, then the western district has to go from Manitoba to Iowa, and the districts will also need to include St.Cloud and the northern exurbs (Sherburne, Isanti, and Chisago).

If you put St.Cloud and the exurbs into the same district with Duluth, then they represent half of the district, and could dominate the district.  By splitting them apart, you have more balance.

[jimrtex]

The Twin Cities are of course far smaller than a congressional district in 2020.

True.  But if you are giving respect to county boundaries, it happens that Ramsey-Washington and Hennepin-Anoka are very close to an integer number of districts.

[jimrtex]

Possible configurations:

A) 4-1-2

1) St. Cloud-Outer Metro North, Chisago, Isanti, Benton, Stearns, Benton, Sherburne, and Wright, plus areas to the north and west.  The metro area is shifted south to include Goodhue, Rice, and Le Sueur.
2) Duluth-Grand Forks- Fargo, and coming way south past the the Minnesota River.
3) Southern Minnesota, La Crosse to Sioux Falls, anchored in Rochester and Mankato.

I rather like this.   The 4 metro districts total 4.007.  If you want to equalize a bit more, trim a tiny bit off Anoka (say, Linwood).

You have the cut of Hennepin, and then have to take about 25,000 from the south. 

Some possibilities include

a) Chanhassen, though I don't like splitting it from Chaska.

b) South St. Paul or West St. Paul, with a shift through Ramsey or Washington.

c) Hasting, with a shift through Ramsey or Washington.  I think I prefer Hastings since it is somewhat isolated from most of Dakota, and does cross the Mississippi.

This is based on populations projected to 2015.5 (3.5 years after the redistribution caused by the loss of a representative),

The 4 metro districts have an estimated 2015.5 population of 4.001 representatives.  Le Sueur and Wabasha were shifted to the south district, McLeod to the St.Cloud-Northern Exurbs, and Big Stone and Stevens to the northern district.

2012 and 2015.5 populations:

Northern: 1.017 and 0.998
St Cloud-Northern Exurbs: 1.023 and 1.006
Southern: 1.016 and 0.995
Ramsey-Washington: 0.995 and 1.008
Hennepin-Anoka 1.979 and 2.013
South Metro: 0.970 and 0.980

[jimrtex]

Possible configurations:

B) 4-3

1) Duluth-Northern Exurbs-St.Cloud
2) Western Minnesota - Manitoba to Iowa, with a somewhat irregular border.
3) Southeastern Minnesota.

This version exchanges St.Cloud for Brainerd and Bemidji.  Like the previous version this will require about 27,000 persons shifted from Sherburne to the metro area.

This map is optimized for projections for 2015.5 (3.5 years from 2012).

Because the southern and western ring of Dakota-Scott-Carver-Wright is so close to ideal the adjustment is made in the north.   In the 2012 map, this area shared about 25,000 persons from Sherburne.  In the 2015.5 map it will need to borrow about 15,000 from Anoka.

Other changes from 2012 map:

West to South: Cottonwood
Northeast to West: Wadena and Clearwater

Population for 2012 and 2015.5

Southern: 1.011 and 0.995
West: 1.019 and 0.997
Northeast: 1.005 and 0.984
Hennepin-Anoka: 1.979 and 2.013
Ramsey-Washington: 0.995 and 1.008
South+West Metro: 0.991 and 1.004

[jimrtex]

Possible configurations:

C) 4-3

1) Duluth-Northern Exutbs and points west.
2) St. Cloud to southwest corner.
3) Southeastern Minnesota.

This shifts Wright to the St.Cloud-Southwest district.  I think this is the best configuration for such a district, avoiding going north to Fargo, or east to Wisconsin.  To compensate for the the loss of Wright, the south metro district will need about 135,000 from either Hennepin or Washington, which forces the other districts to take in the northern exurbs.

If Ramsey-Washington is maintained, then Hennepin will need to be double chopped.

The alternative which is implied by this map is to create the Minneapolis-St.Paul district.   That will require a Ramsey split, and likely Washington and Anoka splitts.

Because Wright is necessary for a St.Cloud-Southwest district that does not extend to Wisconsin border, the 4 metro districts must extend somewhat northward. 

In 2015.5 the 4 metro districts will included 4.010 an increase from 3.956 for 2012.  If a Minneapolis-St. Paul district is created, with the remnant of Ramsey added to the norhern district, then one or two districts will need to take a portion of Anoka or Washington.

Changes from 2012 map: St.Cloud-Southwest to Southeast: Cottonwood; St Cloud-Southwest to North Big Stone and Stevens; North Metro to St..Cloud-Southwest: Mille Lacs and Kanabec.

Population 2012 and 2015.5

North 1.017 and 0.998
St.Cloud-Southwest 1.015 and 0.997
South 1.011 and 0.005
North Metro 0.913 and 0.915
Hennepin-Ramsey 2.218 and 2.259
South Metro 0.825 and 0.836

[jimrtex]

Possible configurations:

D) 3-4 corners.

53% of Southeast is in Dakota
31% of Southwest is in Scott+Carver
36% of Northwest is in Wright+Stearns
28% of Northeast is in Sherburne+Isanti+Chisago



Hennepin East includes Minneapolis, St.Anthony, Richfield, Bloomington, Edina, St.Louis Park, Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, New Hope, and Eden Prairie.

[politicallefty]

Possible configurations:

D) 3-4 corners.

53% of Southeast is in Dakota
31% of Southwest is in Scott+Carver
36% of Northwest is in Wright+Stearns
28% of Northeast is in Sherburne+Isanti+Chisago



Hennepin East includes Minneapolis, St.Anthony, Richfield, Bloomington, Edina, St.Louis Park, Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, New Hope, and Eden Prairie.

That looks like a very reasonable map. The biggest downside is how it divides the MSP suburbs outside of districts 3-5 (assuming current district numbering configuration). Renumbering MN-08 as MN-06:

MN-01: McCain 51-47
MN-02: Obama 52-46
MN-03: Obama 50-48
MN-04: Obama 61-37
MN-05: Obama 70-28
MN-06: Obama 52-45
MN-07: McCain 52-46

Depending on the year, I think that kind of map could result in anything from 7-0 Democratic to 5-2 Republican.