2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California

[SevenEleven]

I don't see a Hispanic district in the SFV in that map. Also not a fan of the southern Central valley districts and generally, I always try to avoid joining SD and OC. What's the rationale for those?

[SevenEleven]

I don't see a Hispanic district in the SFV in that map. Also not a fan of the southern Central valley districts and generally, I always try to avoid joining SD and OC. What's the rationale for those?

The 30th district is over 50% Hispanic with 2018 populations. Isn't that good enough to qualify?
Also I found San Brenardino and Riverside together were perfect for 6, so I decided to nest 6 seats within those two counties.

Generally you are looking at 60-70% Hispanic in these districts. I think the Berman-mander district was 57%.

SB and Riverside are very diverse counties compared to LA and OC. Easier to split them up.

[SevenEleven]

I don't see a Hispanic district in the SFV in that map. Also not a fan of the southern Central valley districts and generally, I always try to avoid joining SD and OC. What's the rationale for those?

The 30th district is over 50% Hispanic with 2018 populations. Isn't that good enough to qualify?
Also I found San Brenardino and Riverside together were perfect for 6, so I decided to nest 6 seats within those two counties.

Generally you are looking at 60-70% Hispanic in these districts. I think the Berman-mander district was 57%.

SB and Riverside are very diverse counties compared to LA and OC. Easier to split them up.

I redid CA-24 and CA-30. CA-24 is now plurality White, and strangely, more D than before. CA-30 is now up to 60% Latino.

It's not that strange. Most whites in the SFV are some combination of wealthy, educated, Jewish, and Iranian.

[SevenEleven]

I don't see a Hispanic district in the SFV in that map. Also not a fan of the southern Central valley districts and generally, I always try to avoid joining SD and OC. What's the rationale for those?

The 30th district is over 50% Hispanic with 2018 populations. Isn't that good enough to qualify?
Also I found San Brenardino and Riverside together were perfect for 6, so I decided to nest 6 seats within those two counties.

Generally you are looking at 60-70% Hispanic in these districts. I think the Berman-mander district was 57%.

SB and Riverside are very diverse counties compared to LA and OC. Easier to split them up.

I redid CA-24 and CA-30. CA-24 is now plurality White, and strangely, more D than before. CA-30 is now up to 60% Latino.

It's not that strange. Most whites in the SFV are some combination of wealthy, educated, Jewish, and Iranian.

It is probably a turnout thing. Also yeah not all that strange.

Turnout is definitely a factor, although the listed factors contribute to that certainly

Also, the greater LA area is by far the largest single state metropolitan area in the country. And the SD area would be the largest in almost any other state. It's a tough region to divvy up.

[SevenEleven]

Which group would be the most powerful in my new 32nd?

27th is Judy Chu. 32nd could be a toss-up, especially if it's Asian Dem vs Hispanic Dem

[SevenEleven]

A few preferences of mine:
1. San Diego and Imperial really don't pair. Imperial should go with Palm Springs/Indio, even if it means a SD-Riverside Split.
2. Orange County has some natural communities of interest that you are chopping up weirdly. Oryx made a good map of them here:
 If you do a LA/OC split, it should be extending an Asian Belt district towards Cerritos, which is a sensible COI.
3. CA-27 should me a majority Asian VRA district. Drop Pasadena and Eagle Rock and shift it east a little bit,
4. The San Fernando Valley makes 2 CDs plus the Burbank/North Hollywood one, so you should really try to keep the 28th south of Mulholland. If this forces a new LA/Ventura split, the best place to do it is along the 101 corridor or from Santa Clarita-Ventura.
5. The Eastern Sierras should be paired with the Antelope and Victor Valleys. Northing should cross from the Central Valley.
6. The North Coast should be intact and separate from the Redding area. Santa Rosa-Crescent City should be one thing.
7. Ideally, Contra Costa/Solano splits should be avoided, and the western parts of Alameda and Contra costa should be looked at as a unit which is separate from the Walnut Creek/Livermore area, even if it forces more county splits.

What do you think of this map.

[SevenEleven]

I really wanted to group Burbank with Glendale and Pasadena on my map

[SevenEleven]

What might a map with 53 districts completely redrawn from scratch look like, with no LA/OC splits?

Do you live in Garden Grove?

[SevenEleven]

Blairite, what's are the demographics of the Valley districts you have?

[SevenEleven]

This is cool. What district did you put the Tri-Valley in?

I have the Alameda portion with the foothills and part of Modesto and the Contra Costa portion with Walnut Creek.

[SevenEleven]

Why not just get rid of the unnecessary Asian belt district? It's probably only 40% Asian and split between two parties.

And what percent Asian is your district 29/31 anyway?

[SevenEleven]

It doesn't look like you have an Asian district in the SFV, am I reading it wrong?

I'm going to fix up some of my LA districts in a bit. I'm curious to see your Central valley districts as what you have is similar to what I originally tried to do but it started driving me crazy and I had to completely redo them.

[SevenEleven]

I ended up settling for this Central Valley map.

[SevenEleven]

I meant SGV, oops.

[SevenEleven]

I meant SGV, oops.

CA-30 is 42% Asian but I can revisit it and make it stronger. After all, it's actually 45% Latino.

42% Asian is fine for that district honestly.

[SevenEleven]

Blue: 41% Asian
Green: 44% Asian
Purple: 32% Asian
Red: 62% Hispanic

[SevenEleven]

Any thoughts?

Is Cisneros in 37 and Torres in 38? Is Lowenthal's successor in 46?

Yes to all of the above.

Are Waters and Bass merged into 32?

Yeah, but Bass probably runs in 28.

What about Schiff and Chu? Does Chu retire?

Schiff is 29 and Chu is 30

Where does Sherman go?

The only district that isn't there for an incumbent is Napolitano's.

[SevenEleven]

What % Hispanic is district 20?

[SevenEleven]

Cook PVI is pretty useless. If it's Clinton +21 it doesn't matter what the Romney vote was. If it's Clinton +5, it also probably doesn't matter if it was Romney +5.

[SevenEleven]

Finished my California map:

Did you draw out Khanna lol

CA-17 is an abomination; there is no way it continues to exist in it's current form.

[SevenEleven]

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.

[SevenEleven]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

[SevenEleven]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

[SevenEleven]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

So then what are you asking for?

There is no need for crocodile tears about the plight of the poor, disadvantaged Republicans.

[SevenEleven]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

So then what are you asking for?

There is no need for crocodile tears about the plight of the poor, disadvantaged Republicans.

So what's your solution to gerrymandering?
What do you want California to do.

I don't have a problem with the way California does things.