2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Minnesota (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 02:01:58 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: Minnesota (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Minnesota  (Read 39613 times)
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


« on: February 22, 2021, 10:45:40 PM »

I find it utterly hilarious how much of this thread is devoted to the idea of pairing Minneapolis and St Paul together...when that is never going to happen under any scenario.
Woke: pairing Minneapolis and ST Paul
Broke: pairing Minneapolis and Dulutch
Bespoke: pairing greater Minnesota with the twin cities

Isn't this illegal? I thought at-large districts in states with multiple representatives were made illegal in 1967.
It's just temporary until a new map is drawn. The 1967 law can also be repealed by Congress.

It seems like they should have plenty of time to draw a map for 2022. The primary is not until Aug 9, 2022. Assuming the data is available by Sep 30, 2021 they could take six months to draw a map and battle in court and still have four months to get petitions and ballots ready for the primary.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2021, 07:13:07 PM »

Here is the complaint. This links to the Carver County District Court and will be available for about 30 days. I'm guessing it will get kicked up to the Minnesota Supreme Court at some time.

Wattson v Simon complaint (PDF)

You will be interested in an Appendix that includes a proposal for a redistricting commission, though I don't think can be voted on until 2022.

I am a personal acquaintance of the plaintiff and very familiar with his views on redistricting law and reform. He's a national expert with few peers.

I haven't spoken to him about this, but I know he is very familiar with the inability of a divided MN legislature to pass a map in a timely fashion. He is also aware that the state justices went to a third party to create the current map. I think he's putting down a marker to be that third party or how that third party should operate.

I'm not sure why the tweet focused on large elections for congress, since that was more a passing comment as to one possible outcome. The outcome he would like seems to be a commission along the lines in the appendix. More importantly he has created plans using the criteria in the model legislation and asks that they be used absent a legislature-created plan.

One challenge for this thread might be to draw 7 CD plans using the criteria proposed for the commission in the complaint. It would be interesting to see how they compare to the map they drew.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2021, 07:50:42 PM »

Here are the principles in the complaint:
Quote
1. Application. The principles in this section apply to congressional and legislative districts.
2. Population equality.
(a) Congressional districts must be as nearly equal in total population as practicable without dividing a precinct into more than one district.
(b) Legislative districts must be substantially equal in total population. The population of a
legislative district must not deviate from the ideal by more than one percent, plus or minus, or two percent, if the plan does not split a precinct.
3. Minority representation. Districts must not be drawn with the intent or effect to deny or abridge the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process or to diminish their ability to elect representatives of their choice.
4. Convenience and contiguity. The districts must be composed of convenient contiguous territory that allows for easy travel throughout the district. Contiguity by water is sufficient if the water is not a serious obstacle to travel within the district. Districts with areas that touch only at a point are not contiguous.
5. Political subdivisions. A county, city, town, or precinct must not be divided into more than one district except as necessary to meet equal population requirements or to form districts that are composed of convenient, 1 contiguous, and compact territory. When a county, city, town, or precinct must be divided into more than one district, it must be divided into as few districts as possible.
6. Compactness. Districts must be reasonably compact as determined by more than one measure of compactness that is accepted in political science and statistics literature.
7. American Indian reservations. A federally recognized American Indian reservation must not be divided into more than one district except as necessary to meet equal population requirements or to form districts that are composed of convenient, contiguous, and compact territory. When a federally recognized American Indian reservation must be divided into more than one district, it must be divided into as few districts as possible.
8. Communities of interest. Districts should attempt to preserve identifiable communities of interest. A community of interest may include an ethnic or language group or any group with shared experiences and concerns, including but not limited to geographic, governmental, regional, social, cultural, historic, socioeconomic, occupational, trade, or transportation interests. Communities of interest do not include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates.
9. Incumbents. A district or plan must not be drawn with the intent to protect or defeat an incumbent.
10. Partisanship. A district or plan must not be drawn with the intent or effect to unduly favor or disfavor a political party. The commission must use judicial standards and the best available scientific and statistical methods, including more than one measure of partisan effect, to assess compliance with this principle.
11. Competition. Districts should be drawn to encourage electoral competition. A district is competitive if the plurality of the winning political party in the territory encompassed by the district, based on statewide state and federal partisan general election results during the last ten years, has historically been no more than eight percent.
12. Numbering.
(a) Congressional district numbers must begin with district one in the southeast corner of the state and end with the district with the highest number in the northeast corner of the state.
(b) Legislative district numbers must begin with house district 1A in the northwest corner of the state and proceed across the state from west to east, north to south. In a county or city that includes more than one whole senate district, the whole districts must be numbered consecutively.
13. Priority of principles. Where it is not possible to fully comply with the principles in this section, a redistricting plan must give priority to those principles in the order in which they are listed, except to the extent that doing so would violate federal law.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.025 seconds with 12 queries.