A redistricting map series

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Effort was taken to have two compact districts. Completely unifying the Providence metro would have been too ugly, forcing the western parts of it to be placed in the more rural district. No towns are split, except for Cranston; the two most westward precincts were placed in the 2nd. While creating a competitive district was not a goal, the side-effect of creating an uber-rural RI CD is that you have a district that is winnable for Republicans, if still a long shot.

RI-01: 65-33 Biden, D+15; 52W, 28H, 15B
RI-02: 55-43 Biden, D+3; 86W

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f12de246-b2f1-47ac-8eeb-ffea91b0cee3

[ProgressiveModerate]

This was very straightforward. Whole-county NV-02, and three minority opportunity seats out of what was left (NV minus NV-02 is about 40-41% white). One district was formed, centered on the city of Las Vegas, and another was drawn in the most Asian parts of Clark County. The rest formed something of a leftovers district with most of the eastern half of the built-up part of Clark County. To confirm to rural being paired with rural and so on, all the empty parts of Clark are within one congressional district.

NV-01: 54-44 Biden, D+4; 39W, 36H, 15B
NV-02: 54-43 Trump, R+8; 63W, 23H
NV-03: 53-45 Biden, D+3; 42W, 23H, 21A, 13B
NV-04: 51-47 Biden, D+1; 41W, 33H, 16B

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f578bcf5-88af-4cf6-b782-045e823a6b16

Firstly, why didn’t Dems do smtg like this instead of their god awful tri-chop? I swear even though top line it may look clean I rlly hate the new NV map as there’s not a single district contained to Las Vegas and city lines seem completely ignored.

I really hope Nevada gains a 5th district in 2030. It'd make a good map fall a lot more naturally and would create a rural exclusive district rather than having a Reno + rurals and Las Vegas + rurals district. It'd also likely allow for an actual Hispanic VRA seat in vegas.

Also it’s weird looking at such urban and diverse seats voting so narrowly D.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This was very straightforward. Whole-county NV-02, and three minority opportunity seats out of what was left (NV minus NV-02 is about 40-41% white). One district was formed, centered on the city of Las Vegas, and another was drawn in the most Asian parts of Clark County. The rest formed something of a leftovers district with most of the eastern half of the built-up part of Clark County. To confirm to rural being paired with rural and so on, all the empty parts of Clark are within one congressional district.

NV-01: 54-44 Biden, D+4; 39W, 36H, 15B
NV-02: 54-43 Trump, R+8; 63W, 23H
NV-03: 53-45 Biden, D+3; 42W, 23H, 21A, 13B
NV-04: 51-47 Biden, D+1; 41W, 33H, 16B

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f578bcf5-88af-4cf6-b782-045e823a6b16

Firstly, why didn’t Dems do smtg like this instead of their god awful tri-chop? I swear even though top line it may look clean I rlly hate the new NV map as there’s not a single district contained to Las Vegas and city lines seem completely ignored.

I really hope Nevada gains a 5th district in 2030. It'd make a good map fall a lot more naturally and would create a rural exclusive district rather than having a Reno + rurals and Las Vegas + rurals district. It'd also likely allow for an actual Hispanic VRA seat in vegas.

Also it’s weird looking at such urban and diverse seats voting so narrowly D.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f16ff584-6ce1-48c1-8798-5e1ec7d5a4f2
This is what a 5 seat map would look like under 2020 numbers. It's inevitable that rural NV will be paired with something, but this is certainly something of a "rural interest seat".
As for the narrowness of the D margins, I suspect they are harder to overturn than they look like on paper, sans a 2014-type year.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

There was conflict between creating minority opportunity seats, compactness, pairing rural with rural and urban with urban, and avoiding seats splitting metros too much. Ultimately, I put as much of the built-up Macon metro in the 2nd. The 3rd is horridly uncompact but can't be helped. The 10th and 13th are part of an "outer ring" taken in newer suburbia and exurbia.

The 11th is a new minority opportunity seat, and is likely to elect a black Democrat. The 4th is now counterminous with DeKalb county. 50% of the state's population resides in 7 CDs that have only 13-14% of the land area.

GA-01: 53-45 Trump, R+6; 54W, 34B
GA-02: 55-44 Biden, D+3; 50B, 41W
GA-03: 66-33 Trump, R+19; 63W, 30B
GA-04: 83-16 Biden, D+32; 53B, 28W, 11H
GA-05: 77-22 Biden, D+26; 58B, 31W
GA-06: 51-47 Biden, R+3; 60W, 16B, 13A, 10H
GA-07: 63-36 Biden, D+9; 33B, 28W, 25H, 14A
GA-08: 67-32 Trump, R+20; 60W, 28B
GA-09: 75-23 Trump, R+30; 77W, 12H
GA-10: 66-33 Trump, R+22; 62W, 13H, 12B, 12A
GA-11: 57-42 Biden, D+3; 43W, 37B, 15H
GA-12: 50-49 Trump, R+3; 54W, 35B
GA-13: 67-32 Biden, D+14; 60B, 26W, 14H
GA-14: 75-24 Trump, R+28; 74W, 12H, 10B

https://davesredistricting.org/join/ccf2e25f-e14b-4278-ad97-c1935444e9ee

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Effort was made to keep the cores of mini-metros intact, since keeping the counties themselves whole was difficult given geography. This was done with some success. The Portland metropolitan area has two urban/suburban seats and two exurban/rural ones that cross out of it. This was a decision I took for sake of compactness, to avoid an awkward looping around Washington County.
The new 6th is R-leaning, but probably D-trending, given its large portion of Multnomah and having all of Clackamas. Half of the population is in 3 CDs that have 10% or so of the population. Portland is whole in the 3rd, which, shockingly, is not Republican leaning.

OR-01: 66-31 Biden, D+15; 64W, 16H, 13A
OR-02: 56-41 Trump, R+12; 75W, 16H
OR-03: 83-15 Biden, D+33; 66W, 12H, 11A
OR-04: 50-47 Biden, R+1; 80W
OR-05: 53-44 Biden, D+2; 72W, 17H
OR-06: 51-46 Trump, R+5; 74W, 14H

https://davesredistricting.org/join/9f44f395-c6bc-43de-bc83-7c5ae6600db7

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

California up next.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This was a big one, I'm splitting this up into Northern California, Southern California less LA, and LA County. One observation I'd make though, is that the CDs bordering Nevada have roughly 55% of the land area of the state (rough estimate), while having only 8% of the population.

Ultimately, I needed CA-01 to cross both sides of the Coastal Ranges to make a dedicated rural  Jefferson seat, and I wanted to keep the county that had Butte whole as I considered it a mini-metro. There's one very rural CD, one exurban-mini metro one taking in outer parts of the Sacremento metro, one urban seat centered on Sacremento proper, and two largely suburban ones right next to it.

In the Bay Area, I avoided water crossings. It was a happy accident no district had to leave Santa Clara and extend into San Benito. Minority opportunity was a factor in the lines, as it was one of the major criteria. There was an effort at drawing a Latino influence seat in Santa Clara, but it failed. I created two strong Asian plurality seats in Alamada and Santa Clara counties. I didn't have to expend serious effort to consciously draw minority seats here, because they draw themselves.

In the Central Valley, it was necessary to have Michigan Rules as it was part of the criteria, so this narrowed the range of possible configurations. A "leftovers" district, its shape heavily influenced by the Hispanic seats, runs from the Kern County line to exurban Sacramento. Fresno has a district to itself.

CA-01: 51-47 Trump, R+5; 67W, 19H
CA-02: 77-21 Biden, D+27; 61W, 26H
CA-03: 51-47 Trump, R+5; 66W, 19H
CA-04: 50-47 Trump, R+4; 62W, 17H, 13A
CA-05: 72-26 Biden, D+22; 34W, 27H, 21A, 15B
CA-06: 60-38 Biden, D+10; 40W, 26H, 23A
CA-07: 75-23 Biden, D+26; 32H, 31W, 21A, 15B
CA-08: 68-30 Biden, D+18; 43W, 26H, 21A, 10B
CA-09: 57-41 Biden, D+7; 42H, 27W, 21A, 10B
CA-10: 86-12 Biden, D+38; 43W, 35A, 14H
CA-11: 77-21 Biden, D+28; 40A, 32W, 23H
CA-12: 89-9 Biden, D+41; 33W, 25A, 24H, 18B
CA-13: 71-27 Biden, D+22; 40A, 28W, 24H
CA-14: 78-20 Biden, D+29; 46A, 31W, 19H
CA-15: 78-21 Biden, D+25; 45A, 35H, 16W
CA-16: 71-27 Biden, D+21; 37W, 37A, 22H
CA-17: 53-45 Biden, D+3; 55H, 31W
CA-18: 57-41 Trump, R+11; 49H, 43W
CA-19: 55-43 Biden, D+4; 48H, 28W, 15A
CA-20: 73-25 Biden, D+24; 52H, 37W

https://davesredistricting.org/join/edd8554e-4eb8-4c62-81fe-0092da3d86a3

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

California (continued)
Southern California less LA

CA-21 has all but the most R parts of Tulare that can be compactly removed from the seat. Minority access trumped the desire to draw a dedicated Bakersfield district, though, I didn't actually try to draw one. Should have, in retrospect, just to see what the results would be. In any case, the rest-of-Kern CD needs to go into LA County in order to reach quota.

The second-largest district in the state runs north from the Riverside county line to Alpine County. It is a minority influence district, but remains R-leaning. San Bernardino was drawn without regard to race, as it was assumed any seats drawn would be Latino by default. Riverside was drawn so that there would be three Latino-controlled seats; the only area left outside of them is a whiter SW part closest to San Diego.

In OC, there is an Asian Belt CD (that also goes into LA County) and a Latino CD, then another minority-influence CD. All three of them are decently compact. In San Diego, there is a "as rural as possible" CD that was drawn to maximize its land area while still allowing it to be a Latino-controlled district. It would remain D leaning due to boomers dying in Escondido. There's also a second Latino CD, much more urban. The vast bulk of San Diego city is placed in three districts. One district takes in leftovers from San Diego, Riverside, and Orange counties.

On the coast of CA, there is a all-in-Ventura CD, and a rural one, that takes in a ton of coastline and lightly populated hills and mountains. Its main population center is Santa Barbara.

CA-21: 51-47 Biden, D+1; 72H, 19W
CA-22: 61-37 Biden, D+10; 51W, 38H
CA-23: 55-43 Trump, R+9; 45H, 37W, 10B
CA-24: 60-38 Biden, D+9; 45H, 41W, 10A
CA-38: 52-46 Trump, R+6; 46H, 36W, 12B
CA-39: 60-37 Biden, D+12; 63H, 20W, 10B
CA-40: 56-42 Biden, D+6; 50H, 23W, 19A
CA-41: 53-44 Biden, D+3; 53H, 29W, 10A
CA-42: 52-47 Biden, D+1; 50W, 30W, 12B
CA-43: 55-44 Biden, D+3; 49H, 39W
CA-44: 54-44 Biden, D+5; 38A, 35H, 23W
CA-45: 63-35 Biden, D+15; 64H, 18A, 15W
CA-46: 54-44 Biden, D+2; 42W, 34A, 21H
CA-47: 50-48 Biden, R+1; 59W, 20H, 18A
CA-48: 50-47 Biden, R+2; 53W, 31H, 10A
CA-49: 53-45 Biden, D+3; 54H, 32W
CA-50: 63-35 Biden, D+12; 55W, 26A, 14H
CA-51: 65-33 Biden, D+17; 53H, 20W, 17A, 11B
CA-52: 62-35 Biden, D+11; 55W, 25H, 11A

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

California (continued)
LA County

Most of Lancaster is in CA-23. CA-25 moves south into the San Fernando Valley. The San Fernando Valley was drawn without regard to race; there is a Latino CD and a white-plurality CD, that also goes east into Burbank and Glendale. South of Ventura Freeway is the sprawling 29th CD, drawn with compactness in mind, given compactness was among the criteria. This also guided the other two seats' specific shapes.

A district has been drawn in an effort to maximize black influence within it, taking in relatively more white areas to avoid becoming Latino majority. Inglewood, West Athens, Westmont, and Culver City are included in its borders, as well as a sizable chunk of the areas directly west of Downtown LA. Right next door is a seat that combines many historically black areas that are host to demographic change. Directly south is a coastal seat that runs all the way to the Orange county line, as well as the islands in LA County. It is among the more Asian of the seats in the county.

The most Asian district is CA-43, drawn to maximize its Asian %.

All other districts are Latino majority. CA-34, located in the south-central parts of the country, is the only one which is over 80%.

CA-25: 55-43 Biden, D+4; 43H, 36W, 12A
CA-26: 69-29 Biden, D+21; 51H, 28W, 15A
CA-27: 67-31 Biden, D+20; 44W, 39H, 12A
CA-28: 69-29 Biden, D+20; 43A, 30H, 22W
CA-29: 74-24 Biden, D+26; 67W, 14A, 12H
CA-30: 82-16 Biden, D+34; 52H, 24W, 19A
CA-31: 86-12 Biden, D+38; 44H, 29B, 15W, 11A
CA-32: 67-30 Biden, D+17; 43W, 29H, 21A
CA-33: 80-18 Biden, D+34; 62H, 24B, 12A
CA-34: 81-17 Biden, D+35; 84H
CA-35: 71-26 Biden, D+23; 55H, 19W, 13A, 13B
CA-36: 64-34 Biden, D+16; 61H, 18A, 17W
CA-37: 65-33 Biden, D+17; 63H, 23A, 12W

[David Hume]

One small suggestion: label the districts.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

One small suggestion: label the districts.

I provide the DRA link because it provides a wealth of info, but I will do this moving forward.