2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Minnesota

[Sol]

Just why are the usual suspects of mapping nerds more obsessed by Minnesota than any other state this cycle? Inquiring minds want to know!

Well, it's losing a seat and the prospect of a Minneapolis-St. Paul district is a fun opportunity for partisan trolling.

Plus I think there's something to the fact that drawing Minnesota is easy--the population distribution divides pretty cleanly so it's not challenging to make good districts, unlike, say, NC or OH.

[lfromnj]

Just why are the usual suspects of mapping nerds more obsessed by Minnesota than any other state this cycle? Inquiring minds want to know!

Well, it's losing a seat and the prospect of a Minneapolis-St. Paul district is a fun opportunity for partisan trolling.

Plus I think there's something to the fact that drawing Minnesota is easy--the population distribution divides pretty cleanly so it's not challenging to make good districts, unlike, say, NC or OH.

I don't see how Jim  is being partisan here. He drew 4 Clinton seats in the area for his final map.

[Sol]

Just why are the usual suspects of mapping nerds more obsessed by Minnesota than any other state this cycle? Inquiring minds want to know!

Well, it's losing a seat and the prospect of a Minneapolis-St. Paul district is a fun opportunity for partisan trolling.

Plus I think there's something to the fact that drawing Minnesota is easy--the population distribution divides pretty cleanly so it's not challenging to make good districts, unlike, say, NC or OH.

I don't see how Jim  is being partisan here. He drew 4 Clinton seats in the area for his final map.

It's more of a 'trigger the libs' argument--it used to also advantage Republicans but not as much these days depending on the map.

[Thunder98]

4-3 Dem map based on the 2016 Election.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/19c10bae-52c6-4e60-a2aa-1799b835cbf7

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Just why are the usual suspects of mapping nerds more obsessed by Minnesota than any other state this cycle? Inquiring minds want to know!

Ten years ago the center of the universe was Michigan btw.

I also wonder how many hours Jimrtex spent preparing his tour de horizon of the history of Minnesota CD's since the time that rocks cooled. That would have taken me a week or more.

This time around it's more a flavor of the month thing than anything else. CA, PA, GA, and now MN.
I'm also the only one who has made a state legislative map of the Gopher State using 2018 population estimages. So far.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/89e2c6e9-76ef-4eab-8810-8be2f1788a58
MN state house map based off 2018 population estimates

You know that House districts have to nest inside senate districts? It could be better to draw the senate map, then split the districts. It it doesn't work out, then adjust some of the senate districts.

I am aware of the nesting.
I'm just following BRTD's advice on what works better in MN.

[Stuart98]

4-3 Dem map based on the 2016 Election.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/19c10bae-52c6-4e60-a2aa-1799b835cbf7

Ugh, I hate Duluth based snakes. You can get four Dem districts without venturing outside the twin cities metro.

[Torie]

Aside from what the final population numbers might be, this seems to be the most Dem friendly division of the Twin Cities metro pie. I am a bit surprised it has not been put up yet.  



Now all that is needed is to reverse engineer the COI argument. Well that prong of Anoka used to be or should have been in Hennepin, it is right next door to Minneapolis, and taking in the rest of Anoka just fills out the missing population, and BRTD has relatives in Coon Rapids to boot. The fact that Jimrtex would hate it is proof positive, because there is 100% correlation between what he wants and what is wrong. When was the last time he was even in a place known as full of nice people? We know it is never because he does not like spending time with nice people. That is why he lives in Texas come to think of it.

Moderators, absolutely nothing in the above paragraph is true. I admit that now. So it cannot be infracted because I just denounced it. Thank you.

[Nyvin]

Aside from what the final population numbers might be, this seems to be the most Dem friendly division of the Twin Cities metro pie. I am a bit surprised it has not been put up yet.  



Now all that is needed is to reverse engineer the COI argument. Well that prong of Anoka used to be or should have been in Hennepin, it is right next door to Minneapolis, and taking in the rest of Anoka just fills out the missing population, and BRTD has relatives in Coon Rapids to boot. The fact that Jimrtex would hate it is proof positive, because there is 100% correlation between what he wants and what is wrong. When was the last time he was even in a place known as full of nice people? We know it is never because he does not like spending time with nice people. That is why he lives in Texas come to think of it.

Moderators, absolutely nothing in the above paragraph is true. I admit that now. So it cannot be infracted because I just denounced it. Thank you.

Kinda looks like the map I posted on page 3.   Only real difference is that I don't use Wright county at all and keep MN-2 with the southeastern counties similar to how it's setup right now.

[Thunder98]

4-3 Dem map based on the 2016 Election.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/19c10bae-52c6-4e60-a2aa-1799b835cbf7

Ugh, I hate Duluth based snakes. You can get four Dem districts without venturing outside the twin cities metro.

It will be a lot easier to make 4 dem districts in the twin cities once we get the 2020 Election and census data at some point this year.

[jimrtex]

Just why are the usual suspects of mapping nerds more obsessed by Minnesota than any other state this cycle? Inquiring minds want to know!

Ten years ago the center of the universe was Michigan btw.

I also wonder how many hours Jimrtex spent preparing his tour de horizon of the history of Minnesota CD's since the time that rocks cooled. That would have taken me a week or more.

This time around it's more a flavor of the month thing than anything else. CA, PA, GA, and now MN.
I'm also the only one who has made a state legislative map of the Gopher State using 2018 population estimages. So far.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/89e2c6e9-76ef-4eab-8810-8be2f1788a58
MN state house map based off 2018 population estimates

You know that House districts have to nest inside senate districts? It could be better to draw the senate map, then split the districts. It it doesn't work out, then adjust some of the senate districts.

I am aware of the nesting.
I'm just following BRTD's advice on what works better in MN.

Why does he advise that?

[jimrtex]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/457efc6a-abe1-4392-a284-fcfe34cab9b9
This is designed to be a Dem-friendly counterpart of the concept map I made previously. MN-02 is drawn to be "ideal" CoI-wise but also in a way that helps Dems; it probably moves very slightly to the left. MN-03 becoming more GOP-friendly is inevitable but I cushioned things for Dean Phillips by giving him some heavily Dem suburbs in the north of Hennipen County. MN-01, in this iteration, barely moves right at all. MN-07 gets eliminated, with Fischbach facing a primary with either Stauber or Emmer.
The MSP districts reflect the division between north and south parts of the metro, though the specifics of the border between 3 and 5 are very much in line with a laser-focus on helping Dean Phillips.

Is your map going to get through both houses of the legislature?

This is a question that could equally be asked of your maps, and the answer would be a definite no. Why precisely do you think that the Minnesota courts would be any more sympathetic to your opinions than any other Minnesotan?

I recognize that no map will be passed by the Minnesota legislature. The Republicans control the Senate, the Democrats control the House. They have already laid out the procedure when the legislature fails to act.

Please (re)read this article, and take the time to actually read Hippert v Ritchie

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=374399.msg7941252#msg7941252

(1) The legislature is not going to pass a congressional map.

(2) The map will be drawn by the Minnesota courts (see Growe v Emison)

(3) The day after the the apportionment numbers are announced, suit will be filed that Minnesota does not have seven congressional districts. The Minnesota Supreme Court will take jurisdiction, but delay action until the legislature fails to act.

The court only has authority to correct an omission or commission by the legislature. The legislature is not going to pass a congressional map.

(4) Minnesota statute requires a map 25 weeks before the primary. Sooner or later Tim Walz is going to admit that the legislature is not going to act regardless of how many special sessions he calls.

(5) The Supreme Court will use the same procedures as were used in 2001 and 2011. The panel will repeat the analysis done in 2001 when they switched to a 5:3 plan over the objections of the DFL and R hacks, and conclude that 4:3 fits the state geography. Nobody has ever argued that going out to St. Cloud is a good idea.

(6) My map preserves the existing three out-state districts while adjusting their population upward. It is a slam dunk.

[jimrtex]

Aside from what the final population numbers might be, this seems to be the most Dem friendly division of the Twin Cities metro pie. I am a bit surprised it has not been put up yet.  



Now all that is needed is to reverse engineer the COI argument. Well that prong of Anoka used to be or should have been in Hennepin, it is right next door to Minneapolis, and taking in the rest of Anoka just fills out the missing population, and BRTD has relatives in Coon Rapids to boot.

Actually the Anoka panhandle and east Minneapolis should be in Ramsey.

At least you acknowledge that there will have to be a pretextual argument to bamboozle the 5-judge panel.

[EastAnglianLefty]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/457efc6a-abe1-4392-a284-fcfe34cab9b9
This is designed to be a Dem-friendly counterpart of the concept map I made previously. MN-02 is drawn to be "ideal" CoI-wise but also in a way that helps Dems; it probably moves very slightly to the left. MN-03 becoming more GOP-friendly is inevitable but I cushioned things for Dean Phillips by giving him some heavily Dem suburbs in the north of Hennipen County. MN-01, in this iteration, barely moves right at all. MN-07 gets eliminated, with Fischbach facing a primary with either Stauber or Emmer.
The MSP districts reflect the division between north and south parts of the metro, though the specifics of the border between 3 and 5 are very much in line with a laser-focus on helping Dean Phillips.

Is your map going to get through both houses of the legislature?

This is a question that could equally be asked of your maps, and the answer would be a definite no. Why precisely do you think that the Minnesota courts would be any more sympathetic to your opinions than any other Minnesotan?

I recognize that no map will be passed by the Minnesota legislature. The Republicans control the Senate, the Democrats control the House. They have already laid out the procedure when the legislature fails to act.

Please (re)read this article, and take the time to actually read Hippert v Ritchie

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=374399.msg7941252#msg7941252

(1) The legislature is not going to pass a congressional map.

(2) The map will be drawn by the Minnesota courts (see Growe v Emison)

(3) The day after the the apportionment numbers are announced, suit will be filed that Minnesota does not have seven congressional districts. The Minnesota Supreme Court will take jurisdiction, but delay action until the legislature fails to act.

The court only has authority to correct an omission or commission by the legislature. The legislature is not going to pass a congressional map.

(4) Minnesota statute requires a map 25 weeks before the primary. Sooner or later Tim Walz is going to admit that the legislature is not going to act regardless of how many special sessions he calls.

(5) The Supreme Court will use the same procedures as were used in 2001 and 2011. The panel will repeat the analysis done in 2001 when they switched to a 5:3 plan over the objections of the DFL and R hacks, and conclude that 4:3 fits the state geography. Nobody has ever argued that going out to St. Cloud is a good idea.

(6) My map preserves the existing three out-state districts while adjusting their population upward. It is a slam dunk.

I realise that you think "I am extremely arrogant" is a good argument, but reasonable minds can differ on this one.

In any case, it's perfectly possible to assign 4 seats to the metro whilst putting Minneapolis and St. Paul in separate districts, and that is the bit that people are actually arguing with you about.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Aside from what the final population numbers might be, this seems to be the most Dem friendly division of the Twin Cities metro pie. I am a bit surprised it has not been put up yet. 



Now all that is needed is to reverse engineer the COI argument. Well that prong of Anoka used to be or should have been in Hennepin, it is right next door to Minneapolis, and taking in the rest of Anoka just fills out the missing population, and BRTD has relatives in Coon Rapids to boot.

Actually the Anoka panhandle and east Minneapolis should be in Ramsey.

At least you acknowledge that there will have to be a pretextual argument to bamboozle the 5-judge panel.

All of Ramsey+Anoka Panhandle+as much of Minneapolis as is needed?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b1154f99-7765-4758-9378-6766ec91037b

Jimrtex's comments made me wonder what would/could happen if one made a Ramsey+as much of Anoka as was needed.
Currently 1, 7, and 8 are rural; 2 and 3 are suburban; 4 and 5 are urban; and 6 is rural-suburban hybrid. Under this map, the current 7th is eliminated, split between 7 and 1. 1 gives up half its territory to 2, which takes it from suburban to suburban-rural. The balance of rural-suburban in 6 also moves a bit more suburban as well. Thus: 1 and 7 are rural, 3 is suburban, 4 and 5 are urban, and 2 and 6 are rural-suburban.

[jimrtex]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/457efc6a-abe1-4392-a284-fcfe34cab9b9
This is designed to be a Dem-friendly counterpart of the concept map I made previously. MN-02 is drawn to be "ideal" CoI-wise but also in a way that helps Dems; it probably moves very slightly to the left. MN-03 becoming more GOP-friendly is inevitable but I cushioned things for Dean Phillips by giving him some heavily Dem suburbs in the north of Hennipen County. MN-01, in this iteration, barely moves right at all. MN-07 gets eliminated, with Fischbach facing a primary with either Stauber or Emmer.
The MSP districts reflect the division between north and south parts of the metro, though the specifics of the border between 3 and 5 are very much in line with a laser-focus on helping Dean Phillips.

Is your map going to get through both houses of the legislature?

This is a question that could equally be asked of your maps, and the answer would be a definite no. Why precisely do you think that the Minnesota courts would be any more sympathetic to your opinions than any other Minnesotan?

I recognize that no map will be passed by the Minnesota legislature. The Republicans control the Senate, the Democrats control the House. They have already laid out the procedure when the legislature fails to act.

Please (re)read this article, and take the time to actually read Hippert v Ritchie

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=374399.msg7941252#msg7941252

(1) The legislature is not going to pass a congressional map.

(2) The map will be drawn by the Minnesota courts (see Growe v Emison)

(3) The day after the the apportionment numbers are announced, suit will be filed that Minnesota does not have seven congressional districts. The Minnesota Supreme Court will take jurisdiction, but delay action until the legislature fails to act.

The court only has authority to correct an omission or commission by the legislature. The legislature is not going to pass a congressional map.

(4) Minnesota statute requires a map 25 weeks before the primary. Sooner or later Tim Walz is going to admit that the legislature is not going to act regardless of how many special sessions he calls.

(5) The Supreme Court will use the same procedures as were used in 2001 and 2011. The panel will repeat the analysis done in 2001 when they switched to a 5:3 plan over the objections of the DFL and R hacks, and conclude that 4:3 fits the state geography. Nobody has ever argued that going out to St. Cloud is a good idea.

(6) My map preserves the existing three out-state districts while adjusting their population upward. It is a slam dunk.

I realise that you think "I am extremely arrogant" is a good argument, but reasonable minds can differ on this one.

In any case, it's perfectly possible to assign 4 seats to the metro whilst putting Minneapolis and St. Paul in separate districts, and that is the bit that people are actually arguing with you about.

I don't know if you are married or not, but if you are, when did you stop beating your wife, and if you are divorced, was the beating the reason for the divorce, and if you are single is that because you beat your girl friend? Now that we have proven that you are a wife-beater, let's return to witch-burning thoughtful, fact-based discussion of redistricting in Minnesota.

If you review Sol's message https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=374399.msg7943460#msg7943460 where he proclaimed that I was arrogant, he quoted the portion of my article where I stated that the 5-judge panel would adopt my 4:3 division including the 3 out-state districts which clearly retain the current out-state districts.

If he wanted to discuss the four metro districts, he quoted the wrong text.

[EastAnglianLefty]

I think he just wanted to accuse you of arrogance.

[jimrtex]

Aside from what the final population numbers might be, this seems to be the most Dem friendly division of the Twin Cities metro pie. I am a bit surprised it has not been put up yet. 



Now all that is needed is to reverse engineer the COI argument. Well that prong of Anoka used to be or should have been in Hennepin, it is right next door to Minneapolis, and taking in the rest of Anoka just fills out the missing population, and BRTD has relatives in Coon Rapids to boot.

Actually the Anoka panhandle and east Minneapolis should be in Ramsey.

At least you acknowledge that there will have to be a pretextual argument to bamboozle the 5-judge panel.

All of Ramsey+Anoka Panhandle+as much of Minneapolis as is needed?

In 2011, the 5-judge panels held its own hearing on COI, as well as reviewed those held by the House committee. The DFL should be filling the hearing with Anokans claiming that they really are just like the people in Minneapolis.

In 2011, the 5-judge panel was named in June after Dayton vetoed the bill passed by the legislature. The SOS, who was the formal defendant, argued that the governor could still call a special session. The court said, "Fine. If the legislature passes a law by the statutory deadline, it will supersede anything from the court." The legislature did not act.

The legislature should go ahead and act based on estimates. They could touch up if necessary after they have final data.

[jimrtex]

I think he just wanted to accuse you of arrogance.

Are you his muse?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Aside from what the final population numbers might be, this seems to be the most Dem friendly division of the Twin Cities metro pie. I am a bit surprised it has not been put up yet.  



Now all that is needed is to reverse engineer the COI argument. Well that prong of Anoka used to be or should have been in Hennepin, it is right next door to Minneapolis, and taking in the rest of Anoka just fills out the missing population, and BRTD has relatives in Coon Rapids to boot. The fact that Jimrtex would hate it is proof positive, because there is 100% correlation between what he wants and what is wrong. When was the last time he was even in a place known as full of nice people? We know it is never because he does not like spending time with nice people. That is why he lives in Texas come to think of it.

Moderators, absolutely nothing in the above paragraph is true. I admit that now. So it cannot be infracted because I just denounced it. Thank you.

Honestly, this looks like the most likely outcome to me (or at least something like it).  It's certainly D-leaning, but not so unreasonable that a solidly Democratic-leaning court like the MN SC would have any qualms about choosing it. 

I mean, it certainly makes far more sense than any map combining the Twin Cities (which is both a non-starter for anything other than an aggressive Republican gerrymander and with all due respect to those who disagree, honestly makes no sense from a COI perspective).  Combining the Twin Cities would make sense if you had Republican trifecta or a hyper-partisan Republican State Supreme Court.  However, we have a relatively partisan Democratic State Supreme Court (which was not the case last time). 

[Sol]

I doubt Ilhan Omar wants to take a heaping pile of Anoka County, which would vote against her in a primary. And she's very much part of the DFL establishment, so her opinion matters to map drawers unlike AOC.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I doubt Ilhan Omar wants to take a heaping pile of Anoka County, which would vote against her in a primary. And she's very much part of the DFL establishment, so her opinion matters to map drawers unlike AOC.

Sure, but only to a point.  I don’t think she has the pull to sink such a map, not by a long shot.  BRTD would know better than me though.

[EastAnglianLefty]

If the court prioritise COIs above county splits, you could put the Anoka panhandle in MN-5, the rest of Anoka in MN-3 and just shift as many first-ring suburbs of Minneapolis into MN-5 as you need to get population equality.

[Zaybay]

I doubt Ilhan Omar wants to take a heaping pile of Anoka County, which would vote against her in a primary. And she's very much part of the DFL establishment, so her opinion matters to map drawers unlike AOC.

I actually would argue that Omar may prefer taking in Anoka county rather than the surrounding blue suburbs in Hennepin.

Omar's big threat comes from a primary. Having Minneapolis in the seat guarantees her safety in a general, but a primary challenger could possibly take her down. Having the blue suburbs of Hennepin shores up Omar in a general-election sense, but it decreases her odds of holding down in a primary, since these very blue voters could turn against her (as many did in the 2020 primary).

Anoka county is much more red, which would make her seat closer than her current. But in the end, that's not the threat that she's facing down. Meanwhile, the purple county of Anoka comes with the benefit of having fewer registered D voters who could go against her Minneapolis base and depose her.

So, if Omar is looking to shore herself up primary-wise, Anoka is the way to go.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I doubt Ilhan Omar wants to take a heaping pile of Anoka County, which would vote against her in a primary. And she's very much part of the DFL establishment, so her opinion matters to map drawers unlike AOC.

I actually would argue that Omar may prefer taking in Anoka county rather than the surrounding blue suburbs in Hennepin.

Omar's big threat comes from a primary. Having Minneapolis in the seat guarantees her safety in a general, but a primary challenger could possibly take her down. Having the blue suburbs of Hennepin shores up Omar in a general-election sense, but it decreases her odds of holding down in a primary, since these very blue voters could turn against her (as many did in the 2020 primary).

Anoka county is much more red, which would make her seat closer than her current. But in the end, that's not the threat that she's facing down. Meanwhile, the purple county of Anoka comes with the benefit of having fewer registered D voters who could go against her Minneapolis base and depose her.

So, if Omar is looking to shore herself up primary-wise, Anoka is the way to go.

Good points. Also, I just realized - the center of gravity in an Anoka+Minneapolis CD is basically in northern Minneapolis. For an R to win a MN-05 that has Anoka means either a) GOP gets defections in Minneapolis (fat chance) or b) Anoka (more likely) becomes blood red, outvoting Minneapolis. But Minneapolis is very Dem and more populous than all of Anoka. So it'd have to be more Rep than Minneapolis is Dem.
Sounds implausible to me.