2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: West Virginia

[muon2]

In the last cycle WV successfully made the case to maintain the use of whole counties and to use the minimum number of people shifted as criteria for their congressional plan. If they adopt the same strategy for this cycle while losing a seat, then the counties in the current CD-2 would be divided between CD-1 and CD-3.

Using the new Census 2020 county data this plan follows the above criteria and produces two CDs with deviations of 12 people. The shading shows the counties shifted from the current CD-2.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

In the last cycle WV successfully made the case to maintain the use of whole counties and to use the minimum number of people shifted as criteria for their congressional plan. If they adopt the same strategy for this cycle while losing a seat, then the counties in the current CD-2 would be divided between CD-1 and CD-3.

Using the new Census 2020 county data this plan follows the above criteria and produces two CDs with deviations of 12 people. The shading shows the counties shifted from the current CD-2.

That map is extremely ugly.

[BoiseBoy]

A reasonably clean North/South divide with zero county splits.



WV-01 is underpopulated by 1,510, but this is only -0.17% of the ideal population for the district and I am unsure of a configuration that gets a narrower gap without an ugly selection of counties.

WV-01 is R+34.8
WV-02 is R+37.2

[muon2]

In the last cycle WV successfully made the case to maintain the use of whole counties and to use the minimum number of people shifted as criteria for their congressional plan. If they adopt the same strategy for this cycle while losing a seat, then the counties in the current CD-2 would be divided between CD-1 and CD-3.

Using the new Census 2020 county data this plan follows the above criteria and produces two CDs with deviations of 12 people. The shading shows the counties shifted from the current CD-2.

That map is extremely ugly.

Beauty did not carry the day with SCOTUS last cycle (Tennant v Jefferson County). There were a number of alternate plans presented that were more compact or lower deviation than the approved plan. This exercise was to show what one might expect if WV followed the same criteria they used last cycle. BTW it is possible to bust CDs 1 and 3, but insist on a whole county plan as WV has consistently done. An alternate plan will have to do better than a range of 24 as in my example, or a use a clear court-supported metric (eg IA compactness measures) that would allow one relax the need for equality to the extent practicable.

[muon2]

A reasonably clean North/South divide with zero county splits.



WV-01 is underpopulated by 1,510, but this is only -0.17% of the ideal population for the district and I am unsure of a configuration that gets a narrower gap without an ugly selection of counties.

WV-01 is R+34.8
WV-02 is R+37.2

Based on the WV case last cycle, one would need to be prepared to identify the compactness metric being used and then show that no lower deviation was possible using whole counties and the selected metric.

[TML]

As with many other places, the release of granular 2020 census data has thrown a big wrench into the compliance of previously drawn maps with population balance requirements. After toying around several times, I was finally able to come up with a configuration which (1) splits no counties and (2) has a population difference of only 90 between the two districts:

District 1:

Barbour
Berkeley
Braxton
Brooke
Doddridge
Gilmer
Grant
Greenbrier
Hampshire
Hancock
Hardy
Harrison
Jefferson
Lewis
Marion
Marshall
Mineral
Monongalia
Monroe
Morgan
Ohio
Pendleton
Pocahontas
Preston
Randolph
Summers
Taylor
Tucker
Tyler
Upshur
Webster
Wetzel

District 2:

Boone
Cabell
Calhoun
Clay
Fayette
Jackson
Kanawha
Lincoln
Logan
Mason
McDowell
Mercer
Mingo
Nicholas
Pleasants
Putnam
Raleigh
Ritchie
Roane
Wayne
Wirt
Wood
Wyoming

[BoiseBoy]

A bunch of proposed maps from state senators are available on the WV Legislature's website:

https://www.wvlegislature.gov/Districts/2020/senatemaps.cfm

[Oryxslayer]

A bunch of proposed maps from state senators are available on the WV Legislature's website:

https://www.wvlegislature.gov/Districts/2020/senatemaps.cfm

Unsurprisingly, most maps shaft Mooney.

[Brittain33]

A bunch of proposed maps from state senators are available on the WV Legislature's website:

https://www.wvlegislature.gov/Districts/2020/senatemaps.cfm

How lucky do you have to be, as a Republican, to be named Trump?

It looks like he tried any number of reasonable splits by geography just to see how they come out.

[Roll Roons]

A bunch of proposed maps from state senators are available on the WV Legislature's website:

https://www.wvlegislature.gov/Districts/2020/senatemaps.cfm

How lucky do you have to be, as a Republican, to be named Trump?

Not only that, but his political career actually predates DJT's and he apparently won his State Senate seat by beating a Democrat named Donald.

[patzer]

A bunch of proposed maps from state senators are available on the WV Legislature's website:

https://www.wvlegislature.gov/Districts/2020/senatemaps.cfm

I am not at all sure the point of Trump's 5th map. Deviation is enormous

[Oryxslayer]

A bunch of proposed maps from state senators are available on the WV Legislature's website:

https://www.wvlegislature.gov/Districts/2020/senatemaps.cfm

I am not at all sure the point of Trump's 5th map. Deviation is enormous

I guess it's in there to show his ideal, yet unachievable, goal.

[BoiseBoy]

https://twitter.com/bradmcelhinny/status/1447642847537156102?s=21

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/bradmcelhinny/status/1447642847537156102?s=21

The western part of the northern district looks unnecessarily ugly.

[Crumpets]

https://twitter.com/bradmcelhinny/status/1447642847537156102?s=21

The western part of the northern district looks unnecessarily ugly.

I guess they figured West Virginia just doesn't have its fair share of panhandles.

[Frodo]

From last week:

Redistricting sees big changes for West Virginia House

(...) While the Senate’s job will involve adjusting boundaries, members of the House of Delegates will have to consider changing from a handful of multi-member districts to 100 single-member districts.

The House Redistricting Committee got its first look at what those districts could look like during its first organizational meeting on Thursday at the Capitol. The first draft map was based in part on feedback from 12 regional public meetings and three virtual public meetings held by the Joint Committee on Redistricting since July.

“In 2018, House Bill 4002 requires a big change for the House of Delegates in the form of single-member districts,” said Jeff Billings, chief of staff to House Speaker Roger Hanshaw, R-Clay. “We’re dealing with population loss, but we also have population shifts as well. We have kept many of the current district lines where they make sense in the Census numbers and in day-to-day practice.”

House Speaker Pro Tempore Gary Howell, R-Mineral, is the chairman of the House Redistricting Committee and co-chair of the Joint Committee on Redistricting. Speaking after Thursday’s meeting, Howell said much of the feedback from the public supported moving to single-member districts.

“As we toured the state on our listening tour, we heard a lot of people say they liked the idea of single member districts,” Howell said. “I was kind of surprised that we got a lot of that from the current multi-member districts. They welcomed the idea of single member districts. They said, ‘we will finally elect someone who’s most likely from our area and can concentrate their efforts on us.'”

Of the current 67 House districts, 11 are two-member districts, six are three-member districts, two are four-member districts and one is a five-member district in the Morgantown area.

All of those multi-member districts have to be split into single-member districts. In some cases, that could put current members of the House, even those of the same political party, into the same new single-member district, requiring a primary.

There is no word yet on whether the West Virginia Senate will be following suit. 

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1448677841239957506?s=20

Congrats to all who predicted North-South. Mooney gets the short straw as expected. Also, good on Boiseboy for predicting the final plan, just with two counties swapped.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This looks like a reasonable split.

[patzer]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1448677841239957506?s=20
Congrats to all who predicted North-South. Mooney gets the short straw as expected. Also, good on Boiseboy for predicting the final plan, just with two counties swapped.

Just to check- are those the actual district numbers? Numbering the southern district as the 1st would be very odd.


Edit: I checked the actual bill text. 1st is northern, 2nd is southern. The map was just wrong.

[patzer]

Hang on. Jeez.

https://www.wvlegislature.gov/legisdocs/chamber/2021/3X/floor_amends/SB3033%20SFA%20TRUMP%20_1%2010-13%20adopted.htm

This Trump amendment, which appears to be the one adopted, did flip the districts over and make the 2nd the northern one. (As well as putting Pendleton in the south and Ritchie in the north)

It says "SB3033 SFA TRUMP _1 10-13 adopted.htm"

So I assume that means it's adopted. Huh.

Only possible reason I can think of for this is giving Mooney a tiny bit of legitimacy in his new district retaining the number of his old district.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Is that a no-county split map?

[😥]

Is that a no-county split map?

Yes, it has zero county splits

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Is that a no-county split map?

Yes, it has zero county splits

Impressive.

[Stuart98]

We were always going to get a zero county split map here, it's a legal requirement.

[Oryxslayer]

Is that a no-county split map?

Yes, it has zero county splits

Impressive.

WV is kinda like Iowa - less splits and a div greater than 1 person. But that rule isn't hard and fast.