2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 03:58:26 AM
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 Census and Redistricting Thread: California
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 79
Author Topic: 2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California  (Read 87972 times)
SevenEleven
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,588


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #175 on: May 25, 2020, 03:29:23 AM »
« edited: May 25, 2020, 03:33:27 AM by SevenEleven »

Texas is actually a better way to see the map like this
You can draw your individual metro areas and figure out what you want there then draw the rest of the rural districts connecting the metros. California is a hard state for a beginer along with Florida due to basically most of the state being urbanized. Texas lets you divide the state up into mini areas to work with first.

That's definitely true, although California isn't the hardest. I always start with Los Angeles and Orange Counties, because it's a huge metro area with some VRA seats you have to do but a lot of ways to play around with the borders. Then I do the Bay Area, which is pretty easy because it's broken down into different counties and sort of draws itself given the barrier the bay provides. Then I fill in everything else.

Anyway, I adjusted my CA map in three ways. I dropped a LA/Ventura split and moved things around, dividing Ventura County into three natural areas (Oxnard Plain, Thousand Oaks/Simi Valley, and Santa Clara River Valley). I made a Tahoe/Gold Country seat which cleans up Sacramento a bit. Finally, I attached Pittsburgh/Antioch, Tracy, and Modesto to avoid splitting the Stockton urban area. Pretty happy with how it looks now, although I always appreciate criticism:

Is this map allowed because of the Supreme Court's recent VRA rulings? Central Valley looks like a MALDEF suit waiting to happen.

I'm not entirely sure. Is there a certain Latino threshold that needs to be hit for these seats?

Usually around 60+% voting pop

I don't know if the current standard is CVAP or VAP but the commission is likely to maintain a Hispanic district no matter what.

That's why my map looks the way it does. Kings County is no longer under pre-clearance but there still has to be a Latino district.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #176 on: May 25, 2020, 02:32:38 PM »

Yeah, 60% is often a good Hispanic% if you wish to maintain a VRA seat. DRA added citizen VAP which in 90% of circumstances is a good indicator, so just try for 47%+ on that number. However there are two exceptions. One, even if you can't get near 50% on the citizen VAP in the allotted area, getting as high over 50% population as possible is in itself a worthy goal, as shown by CA31. Two, the true voting percentage of Hispanics is even lower than citizen VAP in the south valley for a variety of reasons. CA21 is 71% Hispanic by population but in 2010 it's voter pool was only a bit over 50% Hispanic.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #177 on: May 26, 2020, 07:20:57 PM »

What district is Katie Porter in? She has more money than God.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #178 on: May 26, 2020, 07:55:33 PM »

What district is Katie Porter in? She has more money than God.
I would guess 45.
Logged
I知 not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #179 on: May 26, 2020, 08:03:27 PM »

What district is Katie Porter in? She has more money than God.
I don稚 know. UC Irvine is in 47 (mostly Rouda country). Yorba Linda (Cisneros home) is in 45. I drew this map to minimize splitting OC. I split OC just one (!) single time. I took great pains to keep OC mostly whole.
Logged
SevenEleven
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,588


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #180 on: May 26, 2020, 08:07:48 PM »

Logged
SevenEleven
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,588


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #181 on: May 26, 2020, 08:10:41 PM »



Logged
I知 not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #182 on: May 27, 2020, 09:26:27 AM »

Is that a 52 or 53 district map?
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #183 on: May 27, 2020, 10:08:42 AM »


It's a state house map.
Logged
I知 not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #184 on: May 27, 2020, 10:42:16 AM »

It looks like an Assembly map.
Logged
SevenEleven
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,588


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #185 on: May 27, 2020, 10:56:24 AM »


It is. I think it's a damn good one as well.
Logged
SevenEleven
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,588


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #186 on: May 27, 2020, 01:10:59 PM »

You need to get LA done.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #187 on: May 27, 2020, 10:58:58 PM »
« Edited: May 27, 2020, 11:03:14 PM by Oryxslayer »

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to do with CA25 there, other than revive to 2000 era incumbent-and-screw-hispanics-mander. I know you are adamant about certain things like OC, but you shouldn't fear, in fact you should be eager to go back and alter old districts to make new ones better.

In other news I finished my 52 district map and am now cleaning it up in GIS for presentation.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #188 on: May 28, 2020, 01:30:05 AM »

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to do with CA25 there, other than revive to 2000 era incumbent-and-screw-hispanics-mander. I know you are adamant about certain things like OC, but you shouldn't fear, in fact you should be eager to go back and alter old districts to make new ones better.

In other news I finished my 52 district map and am now cleaning it up in GIS for presentation.
What? My map isn't incumbent protection at all (I eliminated Porter and Lowenthal's districts so I could split Orange and San Diego counties each no more than once; Lowenthal probably retires too). What's the 2000 era thing? I gave both Pete Aguilar and Norma Torres majority-Hispanic VAP districts (Aguilar's current real district is only plurality Hispanic). My IE map has two majority-HVAP districts (the current real IE map has just one).

I was just pointing out how your CA25 looks awfully like it's old 2000 era line under that map, and how the 2000 lines were drawn to protect white democrats, and by the end of the decade, more republicans than the state should have had.

Logged
SevenEleven
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,588


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #189 on: May 28, 2020, 01:46:32 AM »

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to do with CA25 there, other than revive to 2000 era incumbent-and-screw-hispanics-mander. I know you are adamant about certain things like OC, but you shouldn't fear, in fact you should be eager to go back and alter old districts to make new ones better.

In other news I finished my 52 district map and am now cleaning it up in GIS for presentation.
What? My map isn't incumbent protection at all (I eliminated Porter and Lowenthal's districts so I could split Orange and San Diego counties each no more than once; Lowenthal probably retires too). What's the 2000 era thing? I gave both Pete Aguilar and Norma Torres majority-Hispanic VAP districts (Aguilar's current real district is only plurality Hispanic). My IE map has two majority-HVAP districts (the current real IE map has just one).

I was just pointing out how your CA25 looks awfully like it's old 2000 era line under that map, and how the 2000 lines were drawn to protect white democrats, and by the end of the decade, more republicans than the state should have had.


The maps were drawn to protect incumbents of both parties and they worked. Shows how incompetent Richard Pombo was. Of course, those incumbents were a product of a map that was already basically a GOP gerrymander.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #190 on: May 28, 2020, 02:09:21 AM »

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to do with CA25 there, other than revive to 2000 era incumbent-and-screw-hispanics-mander. I know you are adamant about certain things like OC, but you shouldn't fear, in fact you should be eager to go back and alter old districts to make new ones better.

In other news I finished my 52 district map and am now cleaning it up in GIS for presentation.
What? My map isn't incumbent protection at all (I eliminated Porter and Lowenthal's districts so I could split Orange and San Diego counties each no more than once; Lowenthal probably retires too). What's the 2000 era thing? I gave both Pete Aguilar and Norma Torres majority-Hispanic VAP districts (Aguilar's current real district is only plurality Hispanic). My IE map has two majority-HVAP districts (the current real IE map has just one).

I was just pointing out how your CA25 looks awfully like it's old 2000 era line under that map, and how the 2000 lines were drawn to protect white democrats, and by the end of the decade, more republicans than the state should have had.


It does closely resemble the old CA-25. I made Aguilar's district majority-Hispanic instead of his current plurality-Hispanic one. I also kept Torres' district majority-Hispanic. I didn't draw my map to protect white Democrats (It likely takes down a fair amount of incumbent white Democrats; I drew out Lowenthal and Porter to keep Orange County mostly whole; anticipating Lowenthal's retirement due to age, my CA-44 was drawn to help elect Asian Democrats).

Sigh....your not getting it. I'm not comparing anything anything about the map besides the shape of your CA25.
Logged
I知 not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #191 on: May 28, 2020, 10:14:25 AM »

Although I wouldn't draw one because it's too difficult, has anyone drawn a plurality-Asian district on DRA in the Bay Area, LA, or OC? Is it possible?
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #192 on: May 28, 2020, 11:33:30 AM »

Although I wouldn't draw one because it's too difficult, has anyone drawn a plurality-Asian district on DRA in the Bay Area, LA, or OC? Is it possible?

It is actually incredibly easy to do so in a few specific areas. We were discussing this a few pages back. Presently, CA17 is majority asian and that status as a Asian opportunity seat should be preserved in some capacity. A second asian seat is also possible in the South/East bay if you know what you are doing, since the Tech growth has attracted more of that group. Judy Chu's seat is also plurality asian by VAP, and that seat probably should remain so after you lop off the part to the east, trading it for other Asian communities in CA34. On the 'first draft map' of the 2010 cycle (a map that had most of the COIs and districts we recognize, but had to be edited for the VRA) Chu's seat went from the Asian communities east of Pasadena over to what ended up as CA39, taking in Diamond Bar and the hills. This very well could have been a majority Asian seat. You could also get the Asian bult seat in OC up to plurality level with observant lines. There may also be something one could do with clever lines in SF and the peninsula, but that seems like something only the assembly map could do.

Also, since you brought up Lowenthal's retirement, I think it bears mentioning that 1/4 of the delegation will be on retirement watch, based on their age, after the new map drops. Almost all of the whites in the delegation, who have been around since the incumbent-mander at minimum, will probably be replaced by minorities in their diverse and mostly Safe D seats. Of course, the commission should not care about this, since incumbent residencies are explicitly not data used in their process. We are already seeing the beginning of this mass retirement in CA53. The seats are:

CA03: Garamendi
CA05: Thompson
CA06: Matsui
CA09 McNerney
CA11: DeSaulnier
CA12: Pelosi
CA13: Lee
CA14: Speier
CA16: Costa
CA19: Eshoo
CA20: Lofgren (My pick for most likely)
CA26: Brownly
CA32: Napolitano
CA37: Bass
CA40: Roybal-Allard
CA43: Waters
CA47: Lowenthal
Logged
I知 not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #193 on: May 28, 2020, 04:38:10 PM »
« Edited: May 31, 2020, 02:10:26 AM by ERM64man »

My updated OC/IE map. An Asian candidate takes CA-44. Who takes CA-41 on my map?

Districts:
CA-25: Mike Garcia or Christy Smith
CA-31: Pete Aguilar
CA-35: Norma Torres
CA-36: Raul Ruiz
CA-41: ?
CA-42: Mark Takano
CA-43: Darrell Issa or Ammar Campa-Najjar
CA-44: ?
CA-45: Gil Cisneros
CA-46: Lou Correa
CA-47: Harley Rouda
CA-48: Ken Calvert


Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #194 on: May 28, 2020, 06:06:59 PM »

The legislature picks the first ten, then the commissioners select the next four, I believe.

The Republicans are never going to truly represent their party base here. The education levels sought do not align with your typical conservative voter.
The four legislative leaders may each strike two candidates from each pool, potentially reducing them to twelve each.

Then 8 are drawn randomly: 3D, 3R, and 2O.
These 8 select the final 6 from those not randomly selected.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #195 on: May 28, 2020, 07:36:48 PM »

On to serious discussion


The California Redistricting Commission has selected the final 60 names: 20 of each pool from which the final commissioners will be selected. You can access the lists here:

Republicans
Democrats
Unaffiliated

With these fairly detailed lists, we can begin to discern the shape of the commission. The most common characteristic of everyone is their comfortable income. This is unsurprising - those most willing to participate in redistricting are stable enough to give up time to political activism.
There is another reason. Those with skills attractive to the auditors likely have a higher income. For example, one of the commissioners last decade was a former head of the Census Bureau. Skills such as leadership of an organization, analytical skills, maps skills, resulted in a higher income.

Applicants had to submit what amounted to a resume, including letters of recommendation. 

A dishwasher might claim that his analytical skills are demonstrated by arranging the dishes to maximize throughput, or that he had stood up for a Burmese employee who was taunted by the other employees because she couldn't speak Spanish.

Demographically, the ethnic distribution is what one would expect but with some exceptions. The democrats have more minorities than whites, and the opposite is true for the GOP. The biggest demographic standout is in the Indie group, which is very diverse. It also has a lot of Asians, and we know how that group has moved in the past 4 years. It leads on to potentially conclude that there are D-leaners in both the GOP group and especially in the Indie pool considering the nature of the coalitions. This however should be unsurprising given California's Trend.

The most interesting thing though are the cross-cutting geographic identities selected by the California commission. There are A LOT of Bay Area Republicans, and Los Angeles dominates the democratic pool. This has seems to have been done to temper partisan attachment to ones home region - Bay Area republicans have nothing to present for the GOP in the region, and LA democrats are surrounded by more democrats and will be more concerned with ethnic communities. The problem I am sensing though is that the playing field is not level; this is California and the California Democratic Party has more tools at their disposal. If the Republican contingency is dominated by NorCal, then they won't have the on-the-ground knowledge that would help them preserve Red opportunities in Orange and her environs. I you only have a birds eye view then you may just see a Blue OC and consider it lost.
The commission has tended to have a northward bias. People around Sacramento probably have an inordinate interest in the legislature. People in LA will have more interest in Hollywood, aviation, or the beach. In Silicon Valley, they will be focused on tech.

The auditors are based in Sacramento and may be biased.

Applicants are classified by geographic region. But Santa Clara and Santa Cruz were swapped so that Santa Clara was placed in the Central Coast, and Santa Cruz in the Bay Area.

Northern Central Valley was effectively "Sacramento plus Yolo and Placer".

South Coast was everything from Ventura through San Diego.

Based on registration you would expect South Coast to have 27.60 of the 60 applicants. It has 20, only two of which are from Orange County.

Northern Central Valley should have 4.89 of 60 applicants. It has 11, plus there are three more from San Joaquin County.

While the commissioners are expected to respect the geographic diversity of the state, the auditors did not.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #196 on: May 28, 2020, 07:50:43 PM »

The approach people have been using is to draw districts and claim that they respect communities of interest.

The approach that the commission is likely to take is to identify communities of interest, and then draw lines based on those. This is definitely a requirement under the VRA. You have to pass the Gingles test before you draw the district.
Logged
I知 not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #197 on: May 28, 2020, 08:30:26 PM »
« Edited: May 30, 2020, 09:34:35 AM by ERM64man »

My San Diego and Imperial map. Notice that I numbered the district that Duncan Hunter Jr. represented as CA-43, which is the number it had when it was represented by Clair Burgener.

Districts:
CA-43: Darrell Issa or Ammar Campa-Najjar
CA-49: Mike Levin
CA-50: Scott Peters
CA-51: Georgette Gomez or Sara Jacobs
CA-52: Juan Vargas

Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #198 on: May 28, 2020, 09:37:42 PM »

The approach people have been using is to draw districts and claim that they respect communities of interest.

The approach that the commission is likely to take is to identify communities of interest, and then draw lines based on those. This is definitely a requirement under the VRA. You have to pass the Gingles test before you draw the district.

Yep, and this is why a good CA map take forever and a day to finish. I'll also add to this post that the rules of the road in CA; the CVRA, minority group COIs, and economic/living standards harmonization guidelines all mutually reinforce each other to favor the creation of access districts whenever possible.
Logged
I知 not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #199 on: May 28, 2020, 11:07:28 PM »

What痴 an access district?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 79  
« 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 0.057 seconds with 12 queries.