US House Redistricting: Pennsylvania

[muon2]

Torie,

Here's my take on PA-17 from the GOP maps. You can see that with the Stroudsburg inclusion and by running up to Carbondale I get districts within 1000 of the ideal. Note that PA-17 also seems to have one precinct in the city of Bethlehem as well.

Thanks Mike. Two precincts were taken in Bethlehem actually (Hispanics precincts, both of which voted 83.3% Obama).   That was an error I had made before; I was tricked by a very similar shape right next to it. A change in that area is that Nazareth was added to PA-17. Actually subtle changes to the map were made all over the place (including a revamp of the action around Reading, and doing cuts into municipalities to equalize population (PA-11 takes two in Harrisburg), and yes, they redid the layout of who gets what in the Scranton area in a rather major way). They also did the precinct cuts, since a few precincts don't match (including one in Tioga). Another looks to be in Lebanon City, to equalize out PA-11 which I still can't equalize. PA-17 now has 1,000 too many people in my map, but I suspect I see the precinct cut in Monroe.   

Isn't this fun?  Oh yes, at the moment in my map PA-06 is now short almost 11,000 people. I see a few precincts changes were made in the Philly suburbs - as well as precinct cuts. Yes, it's still morning in CA, but I need a drink! 

Here's my interpretation of SE PA. Some lines are pretty hard to discern. I do take 2 pcts out of Lebanon city, but my PA-06 is within 1K. See if you concur.

Nothing was attached.  Maybe you just decided to nuke SE PA (hey you're a physicist so you have the power man) since the SE PA map is such an excrescence.

take 2 ...

[Torie]

Can't can change PA-07 from that drab gray to darker blue or cyan or something muon2?  Think contrast my man. Opposites attract.  It's really bad where the grey appends PA-13's salmon color.

Oh, and a zoom would be nice too. Yes, I know I'm demanding. I have a license to be as it were.  

[cinyc]

Here's my interpretation of SE PA. Some lines are pretty hard to discern. I do take 2 pcts out of Lebanon city, but my PA-06 is within 1K. See if you concur.

It's probably easier to discern the exact CD boundaries from the legal definition of each district, available here.  It even lists the census blocks included or deleted when a current voting district is split.

[muon2]

Can't can change PA-07 from that drab gray to darker blue or cyan or something muon2?  Think contrast my man. Opposites attract.  It's really bad where the grey appends PA-13's salmon color.

Oh, and a zoom would be nice too. Yes, I know I'm demanding. I have a license to be as it were.  

The zoom is there. Right click then view image works for me.

[Torie]

Can't can change PA-07 from that drab gray to darker blue or cyan or something muon2?  Think contrast my man. Opposites attract.  It's really bad where the grey appends PA-13's salmon color.

Oh, and a zoom would be nice too. Yes, I know I'm demanding. I have a license to be as it were.  

The zoom is there. Right click then view image works for me.

Oh, how high tech!  It's a miracle - just like electricity.  What is electricity exactly anyway (as opposed to its properties)?  Does anyone really know?  Or is it like gravity - we really don't know?   I used to ask these kind of questions of my poor high school teachers.  Most were too gutless to just admit their ignorance.

[redcommander]

So how much does this map solidify the Republicans gains in the state come next year?

[Keystone Phil]

So how much does this map solidify the Republicans gains in the state come next year?

Assuming this doesn't backfire, it totally solidifies the Republican majority.

Guaranteed Dems seats: 1, 2, 13, 14, 17

The 12th (the Altmire/Critz seat) could be a Republican pick up. The 3rd, 6th, 8th and 16th would require a Dem landslide year to be truly competitive. Worst case scenario for the GOP still leaves us with at least eight seats. If I had to guess the composition for the next Congress, I'd say it will be 12-6 in the GOP's favor (it's currently 12-7).

[Senator Napoleon]

Anything about the state legislature?

[Keystone Phil]

Anything about the state legislature?

They passed the maps the other day. It's available at the redistricting website.

[Senator Napoleon]

Anything about the state legislature?

They passed the maps the other day. It's available at the redistricting website.

Do you have a link to the partisan balance?

[muon2]

I've updated my map based on the Senate release of the municipal splits. Here's my map of the SE region with that update.

[Torie]

So how much does this map solidify the Republicans gains in the state come next year?

Assuming this doesn't backfire, it totally solidifies the Republican majority.

Guaranteed Dems seats: 1, 2, 13, 14, 17

The 12th (the Altmire/Critz seat) could be a Republican pick up. The 3rd, 6th, 8th and 16th would require a Dem landslide year to be truly competitive. Worst case scenario for the GOP still leaves us with at least eight seats. If I had to guess the composition for the next Congress, I'd say it will be 12-6 in the GOP's favor (it's currently 12-7).

I think you skipped PA-07 as vulnerable in a very good Dem year. PA-05 may get there in time, depending on the trends. PA-18 might be vulnerable in a good Dem year, if Murphy is not running. PA-12 should be a close race unless the GOP nominee is flawed like last time, if Altmire gets the nomination, as is probable I would think. If Critz gets it, it should be lean GOP is my guess.

[nclib]

The GOP would rather face Critz, even numbering that CD PA-12, though it actually has more (64%-29%) of Altmire's old CD. With Critz having the (marginally) more Dem CD, those numbers may be closer for the primary, but favor Altmire in that respect.

[Keystone Phil]

So how much does this map solidify the Republicans gains in the state come next year?

Assuming this doesn't backfire, it totally solidifies the Republican majority.

Guaranteed Dems seats: 1, 2, 13, 14, 17

The 12th (the Altmire/Critz seat) could be a Republican pick up. The 3rd, 6th, 8th and 16th would require a Dem landslide year to be truly competitive. Worst case scenario for the GOP still leaves us with at least eight seats. If I had to guess the composition for the next Congress, I'd say it will be 12-6 in the GOP's favor (it's currently 12-7).

I think you skipped PA-07 as vulnerable in a very good Dem year.

I guess.

[Keystone Phil]

Anything about the state legislature?

They passed the maps the other day. It's available at the redistricting website.

Do you have a link to the partisan balance?

I don't but it clearly benefits the GOP. They moved one of our two Republican seats here in Philly (my district) out to York county so that they wouldn't have to defend it when my Representative left (which is happening in January). I think there was some favorable boundary changes out west, too.

[Senator Snowstalker]

My God. They'd better take that map to the courts.

[muon2]

My God. They'd better take that map to the courts.

Yes, but given the decision in IL on the challenge there, on what ground will the Dems prevail? Here's a key part of this weeks ruling against the GOP on the Dems map in IL:

As to the partisan gerrymander claims, although we agree with the Committee that the crafting of the Adopted Map was a blatant political move to increase the number of Democratic congressional seats, ultimately we conclude that the Committee failed to present a workable standard by which to evaluate such claims, therefore they fail under Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267 (2004).

Until a political party can show the court a clear defensible standard as to when partisan mapping goes too far, the courts will continue to reject the claims of partisan gerrymandering. The court would clearly like someone to find that standard, but all attempts have generally resulted in an arbitrary threshold that the court cannot justify.

[Senator Snowstalker]

When the 7th district looks like a fish having sex with a cat (they aren't even connected, mind you), it's a problem. When a tilt D state has a 2:1 GOP advantage in Congress, it's a problem.

[muon2]

When the 7th district looks like a fish having sex with a cat (they aren't even connected, mind you), it's a problem. When a tilt D state has a 2:1 GOP advantage in Congress, it's a problem.

I agree that the map is over the top. However, so is the IL Dem gerrymander. The federal court in IL couldn't find a reason to overturn the IL map, despite their concerns about it. I haven't heard a non-arbitrary standard that either party can state that will allow a court to toss a map like the GOP gerrymander in PA.

[krazen1211]

When the 7th district looks like a fish having sex with a cat (they aren't even connected, mind you), it's a problem. When a tilt D state has a 2:1 GOP advantage in Congress, it's a problem.

I agree that the map is over the top. However, so is the IL Dem gerrymander. The federal court in IL couldn't find a reason to overturn the IL map, despite their concerns about it. I haven't heard a non-arbitrary standard that either party can state that will allow a court to toss a map like the GOP gerrymander in PA.

The Illinois decision is notable not for its result, but it appears the plaintiffs actually game up with a standard to evaluate gerrymandering.

As the Committee frames
its issue, proving the required discriminatory effect would require a showing of three things: (1) that
the Adopted Map increases the number of districts that favor Democrats by at least 10 percent
according to an accepted measure of partisan voting, which the Committee proposes as PVI; (2) that
the Adopted Map keeps at least 10 percent more constituents of Democratic incumbents in the same
district as their representative than it does constituents of Republican incumbents; and (3) that at
least one of the districts created with the intent to advantage Democrats is among the districts that
contributes to the proof of elements 1 and 2.




It's both useless and unworkable, but at least it is numerical rather than 'I simply don't like it'.

[muon2]

When the 7th district looks like a fish having sex with a cat (they aren't even connected, mind you), it's a problem. When a tilt D state has a 2:1 GOP advantage in Congress, it's a problem.

I agree that the map is over the top. However, so is the IL Dem gerrymander. The federal court in IL couldn't find a reason to overturn the IL map, despite their concerns about it. I haven't heard a non-arbitrary standard that either party can state that will allow a court to toss a map like the GOP gerrymander in PA.

The Illinois decision is notable not for its result, but it appears the plaintiffs actually game up with a standard to evaluate gerrymandering.

As the Committee frames
its issue, proving the required discriminatory effect would require a showing of three things: (1) that
the Adopted Map increases the number of districts that favor Democrats by at least 10 percent
according to an accepted measure of partisan voting, which the Committee proposes as PVI; (2) that
the Adopted Map keeps at least 10 percent more constituents of Democratic incumbents in the same
district as their representative than it does constituents of Republican incumbents; and (3) that at
least one of the districts created with the intent to advantage Democrats is among the districts that
contributes to the proof of elements 1 and 2.




It's both useless and unworkable, but at least it is numerical rather than 'I simply don't like it'.

Correct, so the challenge to the PA Dems is to come up with something better.

[cowboy300]

When the 7th district looks like a fish having sex with a cat (they aren't even connected, mind you), it's a problem. When a tilt D state has a 2:1 GOP advantage in Congress, it's a problem.

I've thought about this and after you remove the 2 or 3 districts in Philadelphia and the Pittsburgh district, there really isn't much left for Dems to have too many more districts.  I mean those districts are like beteen 90-10 to 75-25 for the Dems while the GOP ones are like 60-40 (on average), therefore, the numbers seem more out of whack than they are for Congressional reistricting.  What map would you propose that is actually clean?

[muon2]

When the 7th district looks like a fish having sex with a cat (they aren't even connected, mind you), it's a problem. When a tilt D state has a 2:1 GOP advantage in Congress, it's a problem.

I've thought about this and after you remove the 2 or 3 districts in Philadelphia and the Pittsburgh district, there really isn't much left for Dems to have too many more districts.  I mean those districts are like beteen 90-10 to 75-25 for the Dems while the GOP ones are like 60-40 (on average), therefore, the numbers seem more out of whack than they are for Congressional reistricting.  What map would you propose that is actually clean?

Here is the neutral map I proposed last month. I used Torie's method for converting 2008 presidential numbers to PVI, and then count PVI's within 1% as even and within 5% as lean. This gives me 8 R - 1 lean R (3) - 2 even (6, 8 ) - 2 lean D (11, 15)  - 5 D. The concentration of Ds in Philly does tilt the map more R than D, with an effective partisan index of 56.6% R when the statewide index is 48.5% R.

I don't know if this was noticed before, but the seven SE counties are almost exactly the size of 7 CDs.

My (2nd and 3rd) maps on page 15 use that.

Very good. I assume that if I want to sustain the deviation greater than 1 in those districts, I need to show that I had followed a dictum to keep as many whole counties or districts within a county as possible. Hence our differences in how to split those seven counties. Other than Philly and Montco which must have splits after creating as many districts entirely within, I only split Chester.

In the meantime I've completed the rest of the state based on the principle of county integrity.

I found that six districts fit almost exactly in the western half of the state, plus Tioga and Bradford, form six districts with a deficit of only 372 persons total. Allegheny and Butler together are within 0.3% of two districts. The other four districts are each within 1.4% of the ideal population if rounded to whole counties. Other than Allegheny, only two counties are divided to bring the districts to with 100 persons. As in the SE no more than one township is divided between any two districts.

The remaining five districts in the east would be within 2.8% of the ideal size if rounded to whole counties. Three of the districts (11, 15, and 17) are within 0.9%. Three counties are divided to bring these five districts to with 100 persons, and only one county subdivision is split between any two districts. CD 10 isn't very pretty, but both CD 11 and 15 are very close to exact with the three counties that make up each district and the western division constrains the rest of CD 10.



For those interested in the political breakdown - here are the 2008 stats:

CD 1: Obama 89.9% - 9.7%
CD 2: Obama 79.7% - 19.7%
CD 3: Obama 51.0% - 47.6%
CD 4: McCain 54.9% - 44.1%
CD 5: McCain 55.1% - 43.9%
CD 6: Obama 53.5% - 45.3%
CD 7: Obama 61.4% - 37.7%
CD 8: Obama 53.7% - 45.2%
CD 9: McCain 58.6% - 40.3%
CD 10: McCain 55.7% - 43.0%
CD 11: Obama 57.6% - 41.4%
CD 12: McCain 56.2% - 42.5%
CD 13: Obama 58.8% - 40.3%
CD 14: Obama 64.0% - 35.0%
CD 15: Obama 55.2% - 44.8%
CD 16: McCain 52.1% - 47.1%
CD 17: McCain 53.3% - 45.6%
CD 18: McCain 54.0% - 44.7%

[Torie]

Isn't my matrix chart just awesome Mike?  I should copyright it! 

[muon2]

Isn't my matrix chart just awesome Mike?  I should copyright it! 

The scientist in me is curious as to how accurate the 2008 to PVI conversion is in general. Have you tested it on a state with both available?