2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan

[Nyvin]

I tried to make the most "plain" map that I could.  I really didn't favor either party or take PVI into account at all (except I guess the Detroit Metro).  I'd think the commission would go with something close to this, if they favor COI's and not splitting counties and so on.





https://davesredistricting.org/join/86c3575b-47c5-455b-bdef-ba4557967108

What would actually really help is only drawing one majority AA district in the Detroit metro.   It allows the remaining AA vote to be distributed much more efficiently.   Other than that just a typical map where each major metro gets it's own district.

I actually really like the MI-2 (purple) district here.  I grew up in the area and the west coast area does have it's own community.  It has way more in common than the MI-1 area (dark green), which is more country-bumpkinish.   Both are safe R though.

[Nyvin]

I tried to make the most "plain" map that I could.  I really didn't favor either party or take PVI into account at all (except I guess the Detroit Metro).  I'd think the commission would go with something close to this, if they favor COI's and not splitting counties and so on.





https://davesredistricting.org/join/86c3575b-47c5-455b-bdef-ba4557967108

What would actually really help is only drawing one majority AA district in the Detroit metro.   It allows the remaining AA vote to be distributed much more efficiently.   Other than that just a typical map where each major metro gets it's own district.

I actually really like the MI-2 (purple) district here.  I grew up in the area and the west coast area does have it's own community.  It has way more in common than the MI-1 area (dark green), which is more country-bumpkinish.   Both are safe R though.

Illegal map, need 2 AA seats in Detroit.

I don't think it'll even be possible to draw two AA majority seats in Detroit anymore,  the numbers aren't there anymore.

[Nyvin]

I think this map is perfection:





https://davesredistricting.org/join/86c3575b-47c5-455b-bdef-ba4557967108

Two AA districts now (I doubt the population numbers by 2020 will be correct though,  probably both very under-populated).

MI-3 (Red) really should go west from Grand Rapids, not east,  the metro itself extends west into Ottawa, makes the most sense.

Love the Flint and Lansing seats, both competitive, both respect COI's in the area.

Tons of competitive seats on the map overall,  only five seats were won by either party by more than 10% (including the two AA ones),  with 3 within 5%.

This is my favorite so far.

[Nyvin]

I think double-splitting Wayne and Oakland between MI-9 and MI-12 as on this map is illegal under the Michigan rules. You can't have two districts that both split the same two counties.

Should be solvable by putting Pontiac in MI-09 and pushing MI-12 down through Mexicantown, allowing MI-13 to take up the rest of Wayne from MI-09.

I wasn't aware of the Michigan requirements.    How about this then?   If all you need is two Black plurality seats, it almost makes the Detroit Metro a Dem gerrymander (only that all the seats are Lean D now, no tossups).





https://davesredistricting.org/join/86c3575b-47c5-455b-bdef-ba4557967108

2016:
1: 33.8%D - 60.8%R
2: 37.1D - 56.7R
3: 42.6D - 50.6R
4: 45.0D - 48.9R
5: 48.6D - 46.3R
6: 43.1D - 50.8R
7: 36.1D - 58.5R
8: 51.0D - 44.1R
9: 51.5D - 43.2R
10: 33.0D - 62.1R
11: 68.0D - 28.6R (47.4% AA)
12: 72.3D - 24.5R (48.6% AA)
13: 55.3D - 39.9 R

3 Safe D
2 Likely/Lean D
2 Tossup
2 Likely/Lean R
4 Safe R

Overall 6 Clinton and 7 Trump

By 2022 I'd expect MI-3 (Red) to trend to either tossup or maybe Lean D.  MI-5 (Flint/Tri-Cities) will trend to Lean R maybe.

[Nyvin]

Perfect?!?  You unnecessarily pull Grand Rapids out of Kent County severing the suburbs and how you drew Detroit was a blatant Dem gerrymander by cracking republican leaning areas.  You made a 7-6 map and so did I: https://davesredistricting.org/join/1d117936-4d28-4a7a-9dfe-529e010bef54
mine actually respects COIs.

If you split Ottawa and Kent, then that's actually breaking up a COI.   The counties east of Kent have very little in common with Grand Rapids, and the metro extends westward into Georgetown/Hudsonville.  

The main focus of the Detroit metro was working around the two AA seats,  nothing else was done deliberately.  

And please - Kalamazoo is a COI with Monroe county?  Or Lapeer with Livingston?  Grand Rapids is better served with Mecosta county? You have county chains/groups in that map that make no sense.

You obviously just packed the Dems into a few Detroit districts and then spread the remaining metros out with Rural areas.

[Nyvin]

Perfect?!?  You unnecessarily pull Grand Rapids out of Kent County severing the suburbs and how you drew Detroit was a blatant Dem gerrymander by cracking republican leaning areas.  You made a 7-6 map and so did I: https://davesredistricting.org/join/1d117936-4d28-4a7a-9dfe-529e010bef54
mine actually respects COIs.

If you split Ottawa and Kent, then that's actually breaking up a COI.   The counties east of Kent have very little in common with Grand Rapids, and the metro extends westward into Georgetown/Hudsonville.  

The main focus of the Detroit metro was working around the two AA seats,  nothing else was done deliberately.  

And please - Kalamazoo is a COI with Monroe county?  Or Lapeer with Livingston?  Grand Rapids is better served with Mecosta county? You have county chains/groups in that map that make no sense.

You obviously just packed the Dems into a few Detroit districts and then spread the remaining metros out with Rural areas.

LOL
>"Ottowa and Kent counties being in different districts breaks a COI"
>proceeds to separate Grand Rapids from half its suburbs by unnecessarily breaking Kent in 2.

Also I love how compact districts in Detroit that don't cut 20 miles into the suburbs count as packing.  You literally shred Northern Oakland County for purely political purposes.

The vast majority of the Grand Rapids suburbs are in the MI-3 district,  the city portion of Kent county actually cuts off very quickly after Ada, which is in the district.   Nowhere close to "half" the suburbs are broke off, the portion of Kent that isn't in MI-3 only has about 148k people, compared to the 278k in Ottawa.

[Nyvin]

I guess you could do it this way (All of Kent, some of Ottawa),  I just hate the wrap around district you end up with for MI-2



https://davesredistricting.org/join/86c3575b-47c5-455b-bdef-ba4557967108

[Nyvin]

Well since everyone here seems intent on drawing a partisan map that would be unlikely to get support from the Republican commissioners it needs for passage, I'll get in on the game too.  Here's a 9R-4D map where Trump wins all the red districts by 10 or more.  Very clean and decent on COIs.  Interesting how it's less brazenly partisan than the current map yet better for Republicans at the same time.  I have to thank you guys for the idea of shoving the VRA districts deep into the suburbs, that's how I could make this map, just shoving them into different suburbs ofc.  This shows how the vra districts are a double edged sword that can be used as a weapon by either party with respect to shoving them into the northern suburbs.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/5184cd9e-e518-41f5-9a1f-8eab1fa5412a

Yeah, because Battle Creek is clearly a COI with southern Wayne, and putting Lansing and Ann Arbor together wouldn't make either upset.

And the Thumb to Saginaw to Eaton district...yeah.

[Nyvin]

The three core Detroit counties (Oakland, Macomb, Wayne) are slightly over 5 districts.  There should be one solely in Macomb and one solely in Oakland.  One AA district can take the excess Macomb population and the other can take Southfield, leaving one district to take the southern and western tier of Wayne, plus most of the rest of Oakland.  

The 10 counties in the Detroit CSA are just shy of 7 districts, which logically means one district from Monroe to Washtenaw and then one district from Flint to St Clair, splitting Livingston between them.  It's pretty perfect, actually.  

The rest falls into place pretty naturally: a Grand Rapids district including suburbs in Ottawa, a Lake Michigan district, a Kalamazoo-Battle Creek-Jackson district, a Lansing-centered district, a Midland-Saginaw-Bay City-thumb district centered on Saginaw Bay, and the north.  

This map has 5 Clinton districts (the 4 in Wayne/Oakland + the Ann Arbor district) but the Lansing district is only Trump +2 and is more Democratic downballot, and the Flint district is Trump +10 but is basically even if you add 2012 to 2016.  

Flint really belongs with Saginaw, maybe not Midland and Bay, but at least it should have Saginaw in with it.  If there's 1 real COI on the whole map outside the Detroit metro, it would be Flint with the Tri-Cities area.

[Nyvin]

The three core Detroit counties (Oakland, Macomb, Wayne) are slightly over 5 districts.  There should be one solely in Macomb and one solely in Oakland.  One AA district can take the excess Macomb population and the other can take Southfield, leaving one district to take the southern and western tier of Wayne, plus most of the rest of Oakland.  

The 10 counties in the Detroit CSA are just shy of 7 districts, which logically means one district from Monroe to Washtenaw and then one district from Flint to St Clair, splitting Livingston between them.  It's pretty perfect, actually.  

The rest falls into place pretty naturally: a Grand Rapids district including suburbs in Ottawa, a Lake Michigan district, a Kalamazoo-Battle Creek-Jackson district, a Lansing-centered district, a Midland-Saginaw-Bay City-thumb district centered on Saginaw Bay, and the north.  

This map has 5 Clinton districts (the 4 in Wayne/Oakland + the Ann Arbor district) but the Lansing district is only Trump +2 and is more Democratic downballot, and the Flint district is Trump +10 but is basically even if you add 2012 to 2016.  

Flint really belongs with Saginaw, maybe not Midland and Bay, but at least it should have Saginaw in with it.  If there's 1 real COI on the whole map outside the Detroit metro, it would be Flint with the Tri-Cities area.

not really.  You just want them together so the seat doesn't vote Trump.  Saginaw and Flint are different cities, not a single COI.  Now if I'm a Republican on the commission, I might still agree to a Flint-Saginaw district, it's a small concession.  But the other side would need to cooperate in other areas.  It's inevitable some districts will be drawn in a way that disproportionately favor one party, but the whole map can't be drawn with subtle decisions that all happen to favor 1 party.

That's ridiculous.  Putting Flint with Saginaw isn't a concession.   The two urban areas are extremely similar.   They both even have significant Black populations.   If that's how Republicans are going to be than the commission is doomed to fail.   You have to agree to basic level COI guidelines,  not just making sure no line benefits Democrats without concessions.

This isn't warfare.

[Nyvin]

The three core Detroit counties (Oakland, Macomb, Wayne) are slightly over 5 districts.  There should be one solely in Macomb and one solely in Oakland.  One AA district can take the excess Macomb population and the other can take Southfield, leaving one district to take the southern and western tier of Wayne, plus most of the rest of Oakland.  

The 10 counties in the Detroit CSA are just shy of 7 districts, which logically means one district from Monroe to Washtenaw and then one district from Flint to St Clair, splitting Livingston between them.  It's pretty perfect, actually.  

The rest falls into place pretty naturally: a Grand Rapids district including suburbs in Ottawa, a Lake Michigan district, a Kalamazoo-Battle Creek-Jackson district, a Lansing-centered district, a Midland-Saginaw-Bay City-thumb district centered on Saginaw Bay, and the north.  

This map has 5 Clinton districts (the 4 in Wayne/Oakland + the Ann Arbor district) but the Lansing district is only Trump +2 and is more Democratic downballot, and the Flint district is Trump +10 but is basically even if you add 2012 to 2016.  

Flint really belongs with Saginaw, maybe not Midland and Bay, but at least it should have Saginaw in with it.  If there's 1 real COI on the whole map outside the Detroit metro, it would be Flint with the Tri-Cities area.

not really.  You just want them together so the seat doesn't vote Trump.  Saginaw and Flint are different cities, not a single COI.  Now if I'm a Republican on the commission, I might still agree to a Flint-Saginaw district, it's a small concession.  But the other side would need to cooperate in other areas.  It's inevitable some districts will be drawn in a way that disproportionately favor one party, but the whole map can't be drawn with subtle decisions that all happen to favor 1 party.

That's ridiculous.  Putting Flint with Saginaw isn't a concession.   The two urban areas are extremely similar.   They both even have significant Black populations.   If that's how Republicans are going to be than the commission is doomed to fail.   You have to agree to basic level COI guidelines,  not just making sure no line benefits Democrats without concessions.

This isn't warfare.

2 separate metros that happen to be similar doesn't make a COI.  That's not how COIs work.  With that logic Flint and Lansing could be a COI too.  I'd be fine with that, you wouldn't.  My point is that I'd be fine with a Flint-Saginaw district, but the rest of the map can't all be drawn to favor dems as well.

Genesee's median income is $39,000,  Saginaw's is $41,000,  Ingham (Lansing) is $54,000.

Also Genesee is 20.7% Black, Saginaw is 18.8% Black, Ingham is 11.8% black.

From 2010 to 2018,  Genesee and Saginaw have both declined in population by 4.4% and 4.7% respectively.   Ingham has grown 4.2%.

I could go on and on here, but the point is clear.

Flint and Saginaw are both urban, and have way more in common with each other than the rural counties around them (or Lansing).   If there's going to be any discussion at all about "COI's" (like you've brought up dozens of times in this thread) then there has to be some sort of framework to go by on what that is and what the goal is to be,  otherwise any district drawn anywhere can be considered a partisan gerrymander.

[Nyvin]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else. 

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together. 

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

[Nyvin]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

Most of Detroit itself is suburban sprawl, there's extremely little true "Metro" in the sense of what you see in Los Angeles or New York in Detroit.

[Nyvin]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts (to the benefit of Republicans at the time), which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

[Nyvin]

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.

An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.

But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts, which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

The current MI-09/11 were drawn to to maximize GOP potential in the Metro region. The 9th packs in the near suburbs which at the time were the solid obama parts of the region. The 11th is designed to squiggle around and collect the 'further' suburbs which at the time were more GOP friendly. As people moved further out, as the exurbs got pushed further back, and as attitudes changed, this no longer was a viable dichotomy that made much sense. Instead, the defining divide is now between the well understood 2016 style coalitions. In fact, one could say those coalitions are even more stark here because this is Detroit, the epicenter of the financial crash where it all began. Looking to these districts for guides on....anything is a horrible choice.

Thanks for the history lesson, but that completely misses the point.  

MI-11 was drawn to maximize GOP influence in the district, by incorporating certain groups of people in it, and MI-9 was drawn as a vote sink with other groups of people.  

The districts have changed their voting patterns, but the people are still there generally.  Northwest Wayne has way more in common (today) with parts of southern Oakland than it does with other parts of Wayne, the vice versa is still true today.

Anyway,  I'll drop the point,  doesn't seem anyone here really agrees.

[Nyvin]

This will probably be my final take on it -





https://davesredistricting.org/join/86c3575b-47c5-455b-bdef-ba4557967108

6 Clinton seats, 7 Trump seats.   Seat in Macomb and Oakland, 2 AA seats.  Keeps most communities together.   Overall a good fit.

MI-5 (Flint/Saginaw) won by Clinton but trending R.

MI-3 (Grand Rapids) won by Trump but trending D.

I'd expect those two to flip by 2022 or maybe 2024.

The Oakland district was barely won by Clinton but it's trending D too.

Other than that the rest are pretty much all safe for either party.

[Nyvin]

Oakland to Newaygo and Wayne to St. Joseph just aren't good districts. 

I particularly like my latest map because the district shapes are incredibly compact -- 3 of them are basically perfect rectangles, and the Flint, Washtenaw and Lansing districts are really good shapes as well (in addition to being decent COIs).  I might swap Newaygo for Barry in the Grand Rapids district; that's the only real annoyance I have. 

The Oakland to Newaygo district is actually a really good collection of all the Metro's Exurban areas around them, from Grand Rapids to Detroit.   They actually do have a lot in common.   It isn't compact sure, but if CoI > Compactness then it's a very solid district.

[Nyvin]

I think more than anything what this thread really needs is a definition of what exactly the "CoI's" in Michigan really are supposed to be. 

Because looking over the maps here they seem to be all over the place.

[Nyvin]

With a Democratic governor, will the map be less hostile to Democrats?

With the commission it's actually the Democratic SoS that matters more, at least that's how it looks now.

[Nyvin]

MI-10 is 76.65% Black?  Not happening.

[Nyvin]

This is an example of why the VRA is stupid and goes against the whole idea of fair redistricting which is to put communities of interest together. From a fair standpoint it makes sense to make Detroit one district because it fits nicely and a city is a perfect COI but no we can't do that because it packs blacks so instead we have to spread them out through the suburbs to make sure we can get two black districts.

Representation for ethnic groups > arbitrary municipal lines.

[Nyvin]

I actually really like this map, kinda inspired by other maps posted on this thread honestly.

I don't think either party would object to it that much,  Clinton only won 4 seats but a lot of the seats are winnable for dems.  Glancing it over I'd think 3, 5, 6, and 8 would all be tossup by 2022 using 2020 numbers.   9 is probably safe for Stevens with current trends in Oakland.

Both Detroit seats are AA majority, and I really like the setup of Oakland with exclusively two districts.  Also the southern border counties aren't a mess anymore with two "block" districts, 6 and 10.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/06892011-f81c-439d-ab87-79c4f50589f8

[Nyvin]

You do realize that was with 2010 pop?


Can we get a big F.

Weird, I had it set to 2018, but it stuck on 2010, it even said 2018 in the sidebar.  Oh well my bad.

[Nyvin]

Okay, take two I suppose :-)

https://davesredistricting.org/join/06892011-f81c-439d-ab87-79c4f50589f8

[Nyvin]

Does this look better?

I guess the Macomb/Oakland split district does make the rest of the map fit together a lot better