2020 Redistricting in Pennsylvania
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:13:15 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, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  2020 Redistricting in Pennsylvania
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 37
Author Topic: 2020 Redistricting in Pennsylvania  (Read 41591 times)
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,058
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #225 on: December 03, 2020, 11:55:21 PM »

FYI you can easily nest two districts in Dauphin, York, Cumberland, and Lancaster.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #226 on: December 04, 2020, 01:49:58 AM »

Following cvparty's lead, a pretty different map that takes a lot of cues from older lines over previous decades (including reverting back to the old numbering). I especially like the arrangement of the 5th and 17th as a fix for the sprawling 12th on the existing map. The partisan breakdown is also pretty fair with the exception of Hillary's uniquely inefficient coalition.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/20f70c49-f319-4f12-95bf-2efeeaf31c85
Logged
S019
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,255
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -1.39

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #227 on: December 04, 2020, 09:07:25 AM »

Bucks will not be cut, it has been left whole since like the 1950's, and a court drawn map is not splitting it and in a bipartisan map, the GOP will want it whole because Fitzpatrick lives in the heavily Democratic southern part of the county, if he lived in the north, then maybe it would happen, but him living in the South guarantees that it won't. This map double bunks him and Boyle and that would lead to loud protest from the GOP and the court would not split Bucks, especially not to pair it with Philadelphia, and eliminate a minority access seat.
honestly don’t care about incumbency; my map is exploring a fair map without conditions. also, it becomes harder and harder to preserve the same configurations as a state continues to bleed seats. bucks county is not an inherent COI. also, i didn’t remove a minority access seat lol? the map has two majority AA seats

This map isn't fair though, cutting Berks three ways is a nonstarter, and Delaware can and should be kept whole. A CD connecting Reading with Berks should just not happen, they have little in common.
Think you mean Bucks, but I promise you Delco is not a COI, what do Darby and Newtown have in common at all. Same for Levittown and Buckingham in Bucks County. Treating highly populous counties as monolithic is a bit reductive. I'd also say a CD connecting Reading with Chesco just shouldn't happen, because they have little in common


Yeah but cutting Bucks is one of those things that just never happens, even the ugly GOP gerrymander of 2010 left Bucks intact. Also there are ways to split Chester into north and South, without cutting Bucks three ways.

Following cvparty's lead, a pretty different map that takes a lot of cues from older lines over previous decades (including reverting back to the old numbering). I especially like the arrangement of the 5th and 17th as a fix for the sprawling 12th on the existing map. The partisan breakdown is also pretty fair with the exception of Hillary's uniquely inefficient coalition.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/20f70c49-f319-4f12-95bf-2efeeaf31c85


Tri cuts of Chester just should not happen, cut Chester twice, either east-west or north-south and forcing cuts on small counties like Schuylkill is not ideal. I like how you handled SWPA though. Also I would personally move Wild into East Stroudsburg, and give Carbon to the 8th, but that is more personal preference.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,219


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #228 on: December 04, 2020, 10:15:21 AM »

Bucks will not be cut, it has been left whole since like the 1950's, and a court drawn map is not splitting it and in a bipartisan map, the GOP will want it whole because Fitzpatrick lives in the heavily Democratic southern part of the county, if he lived in the north, then maybe it would happen, but him living in the South guarantees that it won't. This map double bunks him and Boyle and that would lead to loud protest from the GOP and the court would not split Bucks, especially not to pair it with Philadelphia, and eliminate a minority access seat.
honestly don’t care about incumbency; my map is exploring a fair map without conditions. also, it becomes harder and harder to preserve the same configurations as a state continues to bleed seats. bucks county is not an inherent COI. also, i didn’t remove a minority access seat lol? the map has two majority AA seats

This map isn't fair though, cutting Berks three ways is a nonstarter, and Delaware can and should be kept whole. A CD connecting Reading with Berks should just not happen, they have little in common.
Think you mean Bucks, but I promise you Delco is not a COI, what do Darby and Newtown have in common at all. Same for Levittown and Buckingham in Bucks County. Treating highly populous counties as monolithic is a bit reductive. I'd also say a CD connecting Reading with Chesco just shouldn't happen, because they have little in common


Yeah but cutting Bucks is one of those things that just never happens, even the ugly GOP gerrymander of 2010 left Bucks intact. Also there are ways to split Chester into north and South, without cutting Bucks three ways.

Following cvparty's lead, a pretty different map that takes a lot of cues from older lines over previous decades (including reverting back to the old numbering). I especially like the arrangement of the 5th and 17th as a fix for the sprawling 12th on the existing map. The partisan breakdown is also pretty fair with the exception of Hillary's uniquely inefficient coalition.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/20f70c49-f319-4f12-95bf-2efeeaf31c85


Tri cuts of Chester just should not happen, cut Chester twice, either east-west or north-south and forcing cuts on small counties like Schuylkill is not ideal. I like how you handled SWPA though. Also I would personally move Wild into East Stroudsburg, and give Carbon to the 8th, but that is more personal preference.

Carbon County is literally in the Lehigh Valley at least according to the Census CSA. Pretty clear it should be there.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #229 on: December 04, 2020, 10:39:17 AM »

I’m not going to lean too much on the choice of one word as I say something the poster is already aware of, but it’s always good to remember that the “natural” skew of large cities and “self-packing” are the result of decades of federal, state, local, and business policies that heavily restricted where people of color could live to a small number of communities, so a neutral political process that perpetuates the impact of that ghettoization by wasting tens of thousands of votes in compact but lopsidedly uncompetitive districts, reducing political power for the minority group per individual, is not neutral at all.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #230 on: December 04, 2020, 11:03:37 AM »

FYI you can easily nest two districts in Dauphin, York, Cumberland, and Lancaster.

I saw that, but if Berks goes with the Philly metro, then there's the unfortunate connection of Lebanon to Schuylkill to points north. It looked even worse in terms of compactness than the CD 9 on my map, so I dropped the idea.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #231 on: December 04, 2020, 11:21:27 AM »

I’m not going to lean too much on the choice of one word as I say something the poster is already aware of, but it’s always good to remember that the “natural” skew of large cities and “self-packing” are the result of decades of federal, state, local, and business policies that heavily restricted where people of color could live to a small number of communities, so a neutral political process that perpetuates the impact of that ghettoization by wasting tens of thousands of votes in compact but lopsidedly uncompetitive districts, reducing political power for the minority group per individual, is not neutral at all.

I would suggest that the VRA is a factor as well. Without the VRA one might more easily entertain a gerrymander that feathers those inner city minority areas out into districts that include a lot of the suburbs and exurbs. But that will potentially dilute their votes to the point that they cannot get the candidate of their choice, just the party of their choice. A strong Dem party can in turn protect the minority candidates in the primary, but relying on a party to protect the interests of the minority isn't the point of the VRA.
Logged
S019
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,255
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -1.39

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #232 on: December 04, 2020, 02:38:10 PM »

I guess I'll post my map, too, it's a hypothetical Democratic leaning court map

https://davesredistricting.org/join/4b0ab8e8-c4ac-4306-9eea-a120807c3a47
Logged
cvparty
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,100
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #233 on: December 04, 2020, 02:43:53 PM »

Carbon County is literally in the Lehigh Valley at least according to the Census CSA. Pretty clear it should be there.
I think it's better to keep Carbon with Schuylkill and the coal region, plus it's not populous enough to complete a CD anyway
Logged
dpmapper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 442
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #234 on: December 04, 2020, 03:36:55 PM »

Here's my latest version.  I particularly like the south central districts, which together are able to squeeze in as much of the Harrisburg/York/Lancaster-based areas as possible (northern Dauphin is extremely rural and I'd rather get more of Cumberland than that part of Dauphin), and the fact that the light green in the north/northeast is pretty coherent as a COI and quite compact as well. 

Logged
cvparty
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,100
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #235 on: December 04, 2020, 04:37:36 PM »

Bucks will not be cut, it has been left whole since like the 1950's, and a court drawn map is not splitting it and in a bipartisan map, the GOP will want it whole because Fitzpatrick lives in the heavily Democratic southern part of the county, if he lived in the north, then maybe it would happen, but him living in the South guarantees that it won't. This map double bunks him and Boyle and that would lead to loud protest from the GOP and the court would not split Bucks, especially not to pair it with Philadelphia, and eliminate a minority access seat.
honestly don’t care about incumbency; my map is exploring a fair map without conditions. also, it becomes harder and harder to preserve the same configurations as a state continues to bleed seats. bucks county is not an inherent COI. also, i didn’t remove a minority access seat lol? the map has two majority AA seats

This map isn't fair though, cutting Berks three ways is a nonstarter, and Delaware can and should be kept whole. A CD connecting Reading with Berks should just not happen, they have little in common.
Think you mean Bucks, but I promise you Delco is not a COI, what do Darby and Newtown have in common at all. Same for Levittown and Buckingham in Bucks County. Treating highly populous counties as monolithic is a bit reductive. I'd also say a CD connecting Reading with Chesco just shouldn't happen, because they have little in common


Yeah but cutting Bucks is one of those things that just never happens, even the ugly GOP gerrymander of 2010 left Bucks intact. Also there are ways to split Chester into north and South, without cutting Bucks three ways.
I'm not cutting Chesco because my point is not to cut Chesco lol, as it's actually a cohesive community and goes with the western half of Delco more than anything. The configurement also allows for a second AA seat instead of a wishy-washy minority coalition seat, and allows Philly to be divided along logical lines rather than cutting through Center City and South Philly along the Delaware. If really preferred, one could reduce the county splits to 16, but I don't like it as much as it's worse from a COI and compactness standpoint
Logged
Boss_Rahm
Rookie
**
Posts: 209


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #236 on: December 04, 2020, 10:11:40 PM »

I’m not going to lean too much on the choice of one word as I say something the poster is already aware of, but it’s always good to remember that the “natural” skew of large cities and “self-packing” are the result of decades of federal, state, local, and business policies that heavily restricted where people of color could live to a small number of communities, so a neutral political process that perpetuates the impact of that ghettoization by wasting tens of thousands of votes in compact but lopsidedly uncompetitive districts, reducing political power for the minority group per individual, is not neutral at all.
This cannot be repeated enough.
Logged
Starry Eyed Jagaloon
Blairite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #237 on: December 04, 2020, 10:24:45 PM »

I'm not cutting Chesco because my point is not to cut Chesco lol, as it's actually a cohesive community and goes with the western half of Delco more than anything.

I actually agree with this but why not take MontCo south/west of the Schuylkill too? It's all Main Line. 
Logged
cvparty
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,100
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #238 on: December 04, 2020, 10:44:08 PM »

I'm not cutting Chesco because my point is not to cut Chesco lol, as it's actually a cohesive community and goes with the western half of Delco more than anything.

I actually agree with this but why not take MontCo south/west of the Schuylkill too? It's all Main Line. 
I've considered that but I've never found a way to fit that in since it lies just beyond the county line, it'd complicate the other districts and bring down the AA population in CD5 too much
Logged
Starry Eyed Jagaloon
Blairite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #239 on: December 04, 2020, 11:14:27 PM »

I'm not cutting Chesco because my point is not to cut Chesco lol, as it's actually a cohesive community and goes with the western half of Delco more than anything.

I actually agree with this but why not take MontCo south/west of the Schuylkill too? It's all Main Line. 
I've considered that but I've never found a way to fit that in since it lies just beyond the county line, it'd complicate the other districts and bring down the AA population in CD5 too much

I think both of these options work.

Cut SW Chester:


Cut South Philly:
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,058
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #240 on: December 05, 2020, 12:42:11 AM »

I'm not cutting Chesco because my point is not to cut Chesco lol, as it's actually a cohesive community and goes with the western half of Delco more than anything.

I actually agree with this but why not take MontCo south/west of the Schuylkill too? It's all Main Line. 
I've considered that but I've never found a way to fit that in since it lies just beyond the county line, it'd complicate the other districts and bring down the AA population in CD5 too much

I think both of these options work.

Cut SW Chester:


Cut South Philly:


I've been playing with a map which does the second thing--the tricky thing is that it forces either a 3 way split of montgomery or a four way split of philly
Logged
Starry Eyed Jagaloon
Blairite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #241 on: December 05, 2020, 12:46:52 AM »
« Edited: December 05, 2020, 01:14:21 AM by Blairite »

I've been playing with a map which does the second thing--the tricky thing is that it forces either a 3 way split of montgomery or a four way split of philly

I'm fine with the Philly quad-cut. Giving Chestnut Hill/Manayunk to Montgomery is a whole district and arguably better reflects COIs. Same with putting NE Philly and Lower Bucks together. The tricky thing is working out what to do with the rest of Bucks and the Lehigh Valley. This is where I'm stuck:

Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,136
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #242 on: December 05, 2020, 12:50:08 AM »
« Edited: December 05, 2020, 12:53:37 AM by Southern Governor Punxsutawney Phil »

Splitting Bucks is a bad idea, was a bad idea, and will always be a bad idea in my book. It's not something I ever will do in a serious map and any post about a map that has such a split will not get a recommend from me, per a matter of principle. (unless it's about how it's a terrible idea)
Logged
Starry Eyed Jagaloon
Blairite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #243 on: December 05, 2020, 12:59:39 AM »

Splitting Bucks is a bad idea, was a bad idea, and will always be a bad idea in my book. It's not something I ever will do in a serious map and any post about a map that has such a split will not get a recommend from me, per a matter of principle. (unless it's about how it's a terrible idea)

One of Montgomery, Bucks, or Chester will have to be split. Why is it inherently fairer to split Chester or Montgomery than Bucks?
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,136
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #244 on: December 05, 2020, 01:11:08 AM »

Splitting Bucks is a bad idea, was a bad idea, and will always be a bad idea in my book. It's not something I ever will do in a serious map and any post about a map that has such a split will not get a recommend from me, per a matter of principle. (unless it's about how it's a terrible idea)

One of Montgomery, Bucks, or Chester will have to be split. Why is it inherently fairer to split Chester or Montgomery than Bucks?
1. it is...erm...extremely weird, never seriously floated IRL in any redistricting plan that came close to going into effect.
2. for all the talk of "oh, Bucks isn't a single CoI", Montgomery by that same yardstick is even less of a cohesive CoI, and Chester is no more of a single CoI by these metrics than Bucks is.
3. Bucks is just short of quota for a CD. I consider it highly unelegant to split it. Better an extra chop of Philly than a macro-split of an otherwise whole county.
4. Geography basically dooms at least one of either Chester or MontCo to not be whole in a CD or have a whole CD within them. Geography likely dooms Delaware to being split in some fashion.
5. Splitting Bucks means you have to do weird things to northern Bucks, which either has to go with the Lehigh Valley (yuck), or northern Montgomery and Berks (also yuck).
Logged
cvparty
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,100
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #245 on: December 05, 2020, 01:36:20 AM »
« Edited: December 05, 2020, 01:46:04 AM by cvparty »

Splitting Bucks is a bad idea, was a bad idea, and will always be a bad idea in my book. It's not something I ever will do in a serious map and any post about a map that has such a split will not get a recommend from me, per a matter of principle. (unless it's about how it's a terrible idea)

One of Montgomery, Bucks, or Chester will have to be split. Why is it inherently fairer to split Chester or Montgomery than Bucks?
1. it is...erm...extremely weird, never seriously floated IRL in any redistricting plan that came close to going into effect.
2. for all the talk of "oh, Bucks isn't a single CoI", Montgomery by that same yardstick is even less of a cohesive CoI, and Chester is no more of a single CoI by these metrics than Bucks is.
3. Bucks is just short of quota for a CD. I consider it highly unelegant to split it. Better an extra chop of Philly than a macro-split of an otherwise whole county.
4. Geography basically dooms at least one of either Chester or MontCo to not be whole in a CD or have a whole CD within them. Geography likely dooms Delaware to being split in some fashion.
5. Splitting Bucks means you have to do weird things to northern Bucks, which either has to go with the Lehigh Valley (yuck), or northern Montgomery and Berks (also yuck).
1. Not really an argument in itself
2. Bucks is more cohesive than Chesco??
3. 130,000 people isn't really "just short," and this becomes more salient with every passing census
4. Do agree that Bucks is more geographically cornered, but it doesn't mean it can't be split, plus demography exists too
5. Reading is definitely more connected to the Pottstown area than to West Chester. It makes more sense demographically to put Berks with upper Montco, even Upper Bucks than to put Chesco with Lancaster or Chesco with Berks (extreme yuck)
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,136
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #246 on: December 05, 2020, 01:50:58 AM »

Splitting Bucks is a bad idea, was a bad idea, and will always be a bad idea in my book. It's not something I ever will do in a serious map and any post about a map that has such a split will not get a recommend from me, per a matter of principle. (unless it's about how it's a terrible idea)

One of Montgomery, Bucks, or Chester will have to be split. Why is it inherently fairer to split Chester or Montgomery than Bucks?
1. it is...erm...extremely weird, never seriously floated IRL in any redistricting plan that came close to going into effect.
2. for all the talk of "oh, Bucks isn't a single CoI", Montgomery by that same yardstick is even less of a cohesive CoI, and Chester is no more of a single CoI by these metrics than Bucks is.
3. Bucks is just short of quota for a CD. I consider it highly unelegant to split it. Better an extra chop of Philly than a macro-split of an otherwise whole county.
4. Geography basically dooms at least one of either Chester or MontCo to not be whole in a CD or have a whole CD within them. Geography likely dooms Delaware to being split in some fashion.
5. Splitting Bucks means you have to do weird things to northern Bucks, which either has to go with the Lehigh Valley (yuck), or northern Montgomery and Berks (also yuck).
1. Not really an argument in itself
2. Bucks is more cohesive than Chesco??
3. 130,000 people isn't really "just short," and this becomes more salient with every passing census
4. Do agree that Bucks is more geographically cornered, but it doesn't mean it can't be split, plus demography exists too
5. Reading is definitely more connected to the Pottstown area than to West Chester. It makes way more sense demographically to put Berks with upper Montco, heck even Upper Bucks than to put Chesco with Lancaster or Chesco with Berks (extreme yuck)
1. Agree to disagree
2. I didn't say that. I placed them on the same level. But come to think about it, you could very rationally argue that the West Nottingham doesn't belong in the same CD as Treddyffrin to a greater extent than, say, Springfield and Bensalem...
3. Bucks by itself can easily form a CD with the addition of parts of Montgomery or Philly or both (but, in a vacuum, preferably just one), either of which might be advanced by some kind of CoI-oriented argument. In a majority of cases, I prefer Montgomery.
4. The supposed "demography" reasons you cite are mere ether, or may as well be so in practice, compared to other, more weighty things.
5. Berks is generally best paired with whatever leftovers exist from MontCo or Chester, plus adjacent territory east of the Schylkill (such as Lebanon County, Northumberland County, etc).
Logged
EastAnglianLefty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,567


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #247 on: December 05, 2020, 06:29:34 AM »

It's not necessarily an either/or between keeping Bucks whole and keeping Delaware whole. This map does both, whilst containing two performing VRA districts: https://davesredistricting.org/join/6a9fa4a4-21e8-4144-b812-0d137b7c2ddd

I think the split of NE Philly is a little ugly here, and I personally think you'd have more cohesive districts if you gave it all to PA-1, hived off northern Bucks to the Berks district and adjusted the Montgomery district to fit, but it's perfectly serviceable.
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,058
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #248 on: December 05, 2020, 10:25:20 AM »

If you reread the 2010 redistricting thread, you'll notice a lot of people talking about the traditional taboo on putting York with Lancaster, and that was smashed to bits in the 2018 reredistricting.

Map drawers often tend to draw districts because "it's always been done this way." See KY-01 and KY-02 for a good example. These taboos aren't usually rooted in a clear eyed understanding of communities of interest--rather blind adherence to previous map-drawing.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #249 on: December 05, 2020, 11:59:57 AM »

Here is another iteration that may have some appeal.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 37  
« previous next »
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 0.069 seconds with 11 queries.