Why do Democratic States tend to have nicer precinct than Republican states?

[ProgressiveModerate]

The more I think about it, the more I kinda think it to be true. Most Dem states have relatively clean precincts that aren't obnoxiously large or messy. They tend to follow roads and make drawing districts pretty care free. (CA, NY, IL, NJ, WA, MA, CO, OR, NM ect).

However, I notice most Republican states tend to have precincts that are much larger in population, often well into the thousands (NC, TX, FL, AZ), have precincts of absurd shapes that are often discontinuous (GA, OH, FL), or have a bunch of tiny 0 or 1 person population precincts scattered throughout the state that are easy to overlook (TX, FL, WI)

In general for this reason, I find redrawing Democratic states a lot more of an easier task than Republican leaning states. Seriously think about it, very few Republican states actually have good precicnts (LA, IN for isntance) that make it so you don't have to precinct split every 5 seconds or go back through adn fill in all the mini precincts you missed.

Is there an actual reason for this correlation or is this just coincidence?

[Sol]

A good bit of this is actually because of the VRA because places with preclearance had to run any changes to precincts by the feds--easier to just keep precincts the same for decades regardless of any changes

[lfromnj]

Another portion as you can tell is Sunbelt cities expansion, Ohio is actually pretty clean except for Columbus which is closer to a sunbelt in expansion and recent population growth

[Sol]

Another portion as you can tell is Sunbelt cities expansion Ohio is actually pretty clean except for Columbus which is closer to a sunbelt in expansion and recent population growth

Along the lines of this, precincts often follow municipal lines, and they tend to make more sense in the northeast than elsewhere.

[jimrtex]

The more I think about it, the more I kinda think it to be true. Most Dem states have relatively clean precincts that aren't obnoxiously large or messy. They tend to follow roads and make drawing districts pretty care free. (CA, NY, IL, NJ, WA, MA, CO, OR, NM ect).

However, I notice most Republican states tend to have precincts that are much larger in population, often well into the thousands (NC, TX, FL, AZ), have precincts of absurd shapes that are often discontinuous (GA, OH, FL), or have a bunch of tiny 0 or 1 person population precincts scattered throughout the state that are easy to overlook (TX, FL, WI)

In general for this reason, I find redrawing Democratic states a lot more of an easier task than Republican leaning states. Seriously think about it, very few Republican states actually have good precicnts (LA, IN for isntance) that make it so you don't have to precinct split every 5 seconds or go back through adn fill in all the mini precincts you missed.

Is there an actual reason for this correlation or is this just coincidence?

In Texas it is partly due to the Ann Richards-Martin Frost gerrymander of the 1990s. The number of election precincts doubled in Harris County (election precincts must conform to legislative districts, congressional districts, and commissioner precincts).

At later redistricting map drawers demonstrated that they had "respected" communities of interest by using existing existing election precincts. This resulted in maintaining legislative boundaries between the precincts, essentially keeping the fossilized boundaries of gerrymanders past.

When I submitted my House map I used a block equivalence list, but the map was scored based on election precincts. It had the two that I knew about. But I had used election precincts in the first place. I could have drawn a better map adhering to city limits more by splitting precincts. This might have resulted in small precincts, but it might have permitted more logical precincts to be drawn.

In Texas, the senate map is drawn by the Senate, the house map is drawn by the House. Traditionally, they are considered by the opposite house at the same time. Doormen are stationed at opposite ends of the Capitol so that they can signal that the two bills are gavelled passed at the same time. The congressional map is drawn independently of the two. And depending on timing, the county maps might or might not use the same boundaries. The officials in each county are aware of which of those lines on the computer screens are actually major streets and useful for dividing commissioner responsibilities.

After the maps are out, county election officials have to notify voters of what districts they are now in and may have to assign new precincts if any were split. This has to be done by the first of the even election year since candidate filings are in December, and voting begins in January for overseas mail voting.

The election officials are aware of the micro-precincts because they have to maintain the voter rolls and possibly provide a polling place. Ideally, polling places are within a public building in the precinct. If you place two precincts in the same building you may need to keep them separate to avoid voters getting confused.

So after they get through the 2022 election they may be able to merge some election precincts. They don't like the micro-precincts because they have to staff them (minimum of three) and find a polling place. If you have just a few voters it is inefficient.

In the past there were supposed to be opportunities for county election officials to propose changes to legislative boundaries to permit merging of micro-precincts, but sometimes that never happens. The legislature is too busy or the districts are being litigated, or it never gets done.

In some cases they might have problems getting pre-clearance. If the precincts are a result of a racial gerrymander, with a precinct with apartments more likely to have a higher percentage of black and Hispanic voters, and one with more single-family residences being whiter, then it may be claimed that the merger is discriminatory, even though any children in the area attend the same school which will be used as a polling place.

There are also artifacts of census geography. In 1990, the Census Bureau did not completely recognize city boundaries for defining census blocks. A block bounded by streets would be a census block. If it was divided by city limits it would be divided into tabulation blocks, so that for example the population of each city could be tabulated. The GIS software might not want to deal with census blocks and tabulations blocks:

123456 and 123456.1

To handle this you would either have to recognize a sub-hierarchy or flatten it so that every census block without tabulation blocks (i.e most of them) would be treated as a tabulation block (e.g. 123456.0).

Since 2000 census blocks recognize legal boundaries such as city limits, so a physical block bounded by streets would be divided into two census blocks.

If a 1990 gerrymander had been attempting to follow city boundaries but also calculate population they might have used the census block which could place a portion of Townville which was intended to be in District 123, in District 124 which was supposed to be made up of Metropolis City. The election precinct on the 124 side of the line would include a bit of Townville or a micro-precinct would be created for the portion of Townville in District 124.

Election officials would have to be aware of this when holding elections so that the Townville residents of the election precinct would not be given a ballot with Metropolis City on it.

Texas freeways usually have feeders. The Census Bureau treats the main lanes and the feeders and the entrance and exit lanes as streets, which results in long skinny census blocks. If these ended up in a legislative district it would cause the district to look irregular or at least hurt the compactness score. So maybe the district boundary will be along the feeder road, rather than the freeway which would be the natural boundary.

States that developed later have an urban geography built on a scale for automobiles rather than walking. There might only be one suitable polling location for an area with 1000s of voters. There is no reason to have lots of tiny precincts like Ohio. They might have several precincts assigned to the same polling place. Remember in 2000 when the punch card ballots got mixed up with ballot rotation resulting in miscounts and Kerry votes going to Nader or Bush to Kerry, etc.

The school building may have sufficient parking for more voters and room for more voting stations. 9 election clerks at one location can likely handle more voters than 3 elections clerks at three locations, because they can focus on single tasks such as greeting, or checking in voters, or watching voter.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The more I think about it, the more I kinda think it to be true. Most Dem states have relatively clean precincts that aren't obnoxiously large or messy. They tend to follow roads and make drawing districts pretty care free. (CA, NY, IL, NJ, WA, MA, CO, OR, NM ect).

However, I notice most Republican states tend to have precincts that are much larger in population, often well into the thousands (NC, TX, FL, AZ), have precincts of absurd shapes that are often discontinuous (GA, OH, FL), or have a bunch of tiny 0 or 1 person population precincts scattered throughout the state that are easy to overlook (TX, FL, WI)

In general for this reason, I find redrawing Democratic states a lot more of an easier task than Republican leaning states. Seriously think about it, very few Republican states actually have good precicnts (LA, IN for isntance) that make it so you don't have to precinct split every 5 seconds or go back through adn fill in all the mini precincts you missed.

Is there an actual reason for this correlation or is this just coincidence?

In Texas it is partly due to the Ann Richards-Martin Frost gerrymander of the 1990s. The number of election precincts doubled in Harris County (election precincts must conform to legislative districts, congressional districts, and commissioner precincts).

At later redistricting map drawers demonstrated that they had "respected" communities of interest by using existing existing election precincts. This resulted in maintaining legislative boundaries between the precincts, essentially keeping the fossilized boundaries of gerrymanders past.

When I submitted my House map I used a block equivalence list, but the map was scored based on election precincts. It had the two that I knew about. But I had used election precincts in the first place. I could have drawn a better map adhering to city limits more by splitting precincts. This might have resulted in small precincts, but it might have permitted more logical precincts to be drawn.

In Texas, the senate map is drawn by the Senate, the house map is drawn by the House. Traditionally, they are considered by the opposite house at the same time. Doormen are stationed at opposite ends of the Capitol so that they can signal that the two bills are gavelled passed at the same time. The congressional map is drawn independently of the two. And depending on timing, the county maps might or might not use the same boundaries. The officials in each county are aware of which of those lines on the computer screens are actually major streets and useful for dividing commissioner responsibilities.

After the maps are out, county election officials have to notify voters of what districts they are now in and may have to assign new precincts if any were split. This has to be done by the first of the even election year since candidate filings are in December, and voting begins in January for overseas mail voting.

The election officials are aware of the micro-precincts because they have to maintain the voter rolls and possibly provide a polling place. Ideally, polling places are within a public building in the precinct. If you place two precincts in the same building you may need to keep them separate to avoid voters getting confused.

So after they get through the 2022 election they may be able to merge some election precincts. They don't like the micro-precincts because they have to staff them (minimum of three) and find a polling place. If you have just a few voters it is inefficient.

In the past there were supposed to be opportunities for county election officials to propose changes to legislative boundaries to permit merging of micro-precincts, but sometimes that never happens. The legislature is too busy or the districts are being litigated, or it never gets done.

In some cases they might have problems getting pre-clearance. If the precincts are a result of a racial gerrymander, with a precinct with apartments more likely to have a higher percentage of black and Hispanic voters, and one with more single-family residences being whiter, then it may be claimed that the merger is discriminatory, even though any children in the area attend the same school which will be used as a polling place.

There are also artifacts of census geography. In 1990, the Census Bureau did not completely recognize city boundaries for defining census blocks. A block bounded by streets would be a census block. If it was divided by city limits it would be divided into tabulation blocks, so that for example the population of each city could be tabulated. The GIS software might not want to deal with census blocks and tabulations blocks:

123456 and 123456.1

To handle this you would either have to recognize a sub-hierarchy or flatten it so that every census block without tabulation blocks (i.e most of them) would be treated as a tabulation block (e.g. 123456.0).

Since 2000 census blocks recognize legal boundaries such as city limits, so a physical block bounded by streets would be divided into two census blocks.

If a 1990 gerrymander had been attempting to follow city boundaries but also calculate population they might have used the census block which could place a portion of Townville which was intended to be in District 123, in District 124 which was supposed to be made up of Metropolis City. The election precinct on the 124 side of the line would include a bit of Townville or a micro-precinct would be created for the portion of Townville in District 124.

Election officials would have to be aware of this when holding elections so that the Townville residents of the election precinct would not be given a ballot with Metropolis City on it.

Texas freeways usually have feeders. The Census Bureau treats the main lanes and the feeders and the entrance and exit lanes as streets, which results in long skinny census blocks. If these ended up in a legislative district it would cause the district to look irregular or at least hurt the compactness score. So maybe the district boundary will be along the feeder road, rather than the freeway which would be the natural boundary.

States that developed later have an urban geography built on a scale for automobiles rather than walking. There might only be one suitable polling location for an area with 1000s of voters. There is no reason to have lots of tiny precincts like Ohio. They might have several precincts assigned to the same polling place. Remember in 2000 when the punch card ballots got mixed up with ballot rotation resulting in miscounts and Kerry votes going to Nader or Bush to Kerry, etc.

The school building may have sufficient parking for more voters and room for more voting stations. 9 election clerks at one location can likely handle more voters than 3 elections clerks at three locations, because they can focus on single tasks such as greeting, or checking in voters, or watching voter.

Wow thank you for the info and detailed reponse as to Texas as it's def one of the most annoying, especially in the cities. That also explains the excessive amount of 0 population precincts that are just part of a road or water.

I really hope for Texas's sake they one day enforce the 5k cap on precincts and also that counties just completely revamp their precincts rather than keep making a messy precinct map messier; gerrymandering should never be an excuse for nasty precincts as such.

This also kinda explains a lot of the relatively nice New England precicnts as the town boundaries in New England tend to be squareish with fewer weird and discontinuous borders.
Thank you

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Honestly this is one area where South Carolina does do surprisingly well in

[RI]

Going to strongly disagree with the notion that CA has "clean" precincts. Their entire precinct creation and election-specific consolidation process is an abomination.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Going to strongly disagree with the notion that CA has "clean" precincts. Their entire precinct creation and election-specific consolidation process is an abomination.

Even if the election process is flawed, you have to admit the precincts themselves are very friendly to work with when drawing maps.