For two years, countless Swingnuts have drawn innumerable maps using Dave's App, which filled a huge void in an enormously crucial way. Indeed, as we wade further and further into redistricting season, it's almost impossible to imagine what things would be like without the app. If it weren't for one man's vision, energy, talent, and dedication, we'd still be mucking around with Microsoft Paint. In short, Dave's has been a total game-changer for us, and we owe him a great deal.
Until now, we haven't had a good way to show our appreciation for Dave's generosity, but fortunately Dave's app recently became a project of Progressive Congress - and we can support his efforts through his new partner to improve and expand the app. As Dave himself explained:
This means that more members and visitors of Progressive Congress will get to know about DRA and that more users of DRA will get to know about Progressive Congress. This means that the Progressive Congress team will be providing advice and guidance for DRA. (Some of Darcy [Burner]'s suggestions have already been included in the app, in fact.) This means that Progressive Congress and DRA will be teaming up to help you better understand what's going on with redistricting and what you can do about it. And this means working together to make government better for the people!
In seven-and-a-half years of running SSP, I don't think I've ever solicited money for anyone or anything other than Democratic candidates running for office. This is going to be my one big exception, and I'm going to be blunt here:
If you've ever drawn a map with Dave's App, or enjoyed a diary that featured maps drawn with the app, you need to plunk down some change to support Dave.
It's important that we support Dave's hard work over the last two years and his continued work in the future, so any amount is appreciated. I know you can skip Starbucks for a week to find $5 or $10. (If a monetary contribution is genuinely beyond your means, then you should contact Dave to see how you can help with adding new data to the app.) And here's a nice side-benefit: All contributions are tax-deductible.
I just threw down $100, and I hope everyone else here joins in. While there are many things which have made the Swing State Project a great site, I think it's safe to say that Dave's Redistricting App is definitely one of them, and I'm proud to support him. I hope you'll do the same.
UPDATE: I just got a report from Progressive Congress, and we've raised $590 from 18 people so far. I'd love to hit $600 and 20 donors. Who can put us over the top?
Arkansas rounds out the first batch (along with Iowa and Louisiana) of states finishing their redistricting tasks, so we've crunched the data to see how the last few elections went in the newly-designed districts. (If you're unfamiliar with the new map, which wound up without the infamous "Fayetteville Finger," you can take a gander here.)
District
Obama #
McCain #
Obama %
McCain %
Beebe %
Keet %
Lincoln %
Boozman %
AR-01
102,670
151,918
39.17
57.96
67.68
30.32
42.29
52.34
AR-02
129,888
157,732
44.29
53.79
66.06
32.28
42.02
53.77
AR-03
85,866
161,902
33.86
63.85
57.84
39.93
26.01
68.32
AR-04
103,886
166,465
37.41
59.95
65.54
32.52
36.49
58.07
Unlike last decade's map (which placed in Arkansas in the company of only Iowa and West Virginia in keeping every county intact), the new Arkansas map splits several counties down the middle, making this a more difficult task than Iowa (and more difficult than Louisiana, which seems to have more useful data). Jeffmd's data crunching involved not only some estimation of how to allocate absentee ballots, but also some approximation of Sebastian County (i.e Fort Smith, now split between the 3rd and 4th) votes, which aren't listed by precinct but rather by polling location, meaning rather tediously mapping the county and pinpointing polling places. (You can check out the full spreadsheet here.)
Despite controlling the redistricting trifecta here (the Gov. plus both legislative chambers), it doesn't seem like Arkansas Dems did much to advance their cause here, leaving the numbers pretty much as is, despite shifting around a lot of counties (especially in the dark-red northwest, where there's now an unsightly bulge of the 4th into the former 3rd). The old districts were 38 Obama/59 McCain in AR-01, 44/54 in AR-02, 34/64 in AR-03, and 39/58 in AR-04... hardly any change at all, although the 1st improved very slightly at the expense of the 4th. If there was any consideration given to either improving Dem chances at picking up the 2nd or strengthening the 4th in the event of a Mike Ross retirement, it didn't pan out.
I like to think of interesting topics for diaries and this is one that came to me. If Puerto Rico was a state it would have six seats. I looked at the census data, did a spreadsheet and filled in my map based on my calculations. I took a few guesses on splitting municipalities, so the deviations aren't exact at all. It would be nice if this was made available on the Redistricting App if possible (obvious hint to Dave), so everyone could work with this just for hypotheticals.
Now, since Puerto Rico has no presidential vote, it's hard to say how any of these districts would vote or how they'd lean. Since Puerto Rico has it's own parties, I assume elections would be decided on issues relating to those parties and it doesn't seem to heavily lean toward either of the main ones there. Many in the PPD align with Democrats, while the PNP has a mix of those who align with the US parties, with those leaning toward Republicans having the edge.
PR-1:
Mayaguez anchors this district. Looking at previous election results, the PPD seems to do very well in and around Mayaguez, so it would probably lean PPD/Dem.
PR-2:
Ponce is the population center and leans PPD, but it also includes many of lower population density areas, which seem to lean PNP. I would guess it would be a toss-up.
PR-3:
Toa Alta and Toa Baja make up the biggest share of population here, both of which have PNP mayors and seem to vote PNP in most gubernatorial elections, which indicates a PNP lean for this district.
PR-4:
Bayamon is largest municipality and has a pronounced PNP lean, but PPD leaning Cauguas makes a up a good share of the district as well, which adds balance. It might be a toss-up or slight PNP lean.
PR-5:
The capital of San Juan anchors the district smallest in size. San Juan swings between both parties, with a slight edge to PPD. PPD leaning Carolina is also a portion of this district, which should equal a PPD edge overall for this district.
PR-6:
Has a portion of PPD leaning Carolina, but all the rest, save for Humacao, leans PNP. It doesn't appear that there is a huge edge toward either side, so I'd all it a toss-up.
Overall, none of this analysis counts for much, as we have no idea how Puerto Rico would swing on a federal level. The island is socially conservative, but economically liberal in many aspects and that could be what determined a lot of voting patterns.
So, on the one hand, I love fairness and justice and support the Voting Rights Act.
On the other hand, I hate stupid gerrymandering and the jiggering of districts to try to make them "safe." For either party. (I mean, really, it's fun to pretend to be Tom DeLay for a while . . . but only on Halloween.)
So I decided to use Dave's Redistricting App to try my hand at redistricting Illinois. Fo' realz. As in, I wanted to create a map that (a) could actually be adopted, (b) wouldn't make an outsider gape in horror and (c) within those parameters, does all the things a good liberal would like it to do. Unlike other posters here, I'm not trying to optimize for Democratic interests -- I'm trying to optimize for the interests of everyone in the state. A state that happens to contain a lot of Democrats.
One problem, though, is that I don't know where to find the district-by-district voting data that would tell me which of my districts are solid Democratic, solid Republican or leaners. I can make educated guesses, but I don't know for sure. This is one of the things I'm hoping you folks will help me with.
There have been many fantastic maps drawn that highlight the potential extremes of gerrymandering, from both political parties. I humbly submit my attempt at making a safe 5-2 map in Colorado that will endure even in bad years for us. Now, I know that either a compromise map or a court-picked one is likely due to the split control in the Colorado legislature, this is purely a what-if scenario if Democrats ran the process and were very aggressive.
Also, this is my first time using Dave's redistricting app and I would appreciate comments and helpful criticism.
With the Louisiana redistricting map one of the first to emerge intact from the sausage-making process, it's time to crunch the numbers and see just what kind of districts we wound up with. (Notice that I'm not saying the map is a done deal... the Obama DOJ might still weigh in and shake things up, as they could conceivably push for a second African-American plurality district under the VRA.) Our resident data guru, jeffmd, has sliced and diced the shapefiles on the state House's website, overlaid that onto the VTDs available from the Census Bureau, matched the VTDs to 2008 and 2010 election results available from the Louisiana SoS website, and voila:
District
Obama #
McCain #
Obama %
McCain %
Fayard %
Dardenne %
Melancon %
Vitter %
LA-01
81,515
233,789
25.34
72.68
25.30
74.70
24.89
69.79
LA-02
235,554
81,703
73.36
25.44
73.01
26.99
70.38
24.72
LA-03
111,831
210,951
34.06
64.25
39.36
60.64
31.40
62.55
LA-04
126,899
187,020
39.94
58.86
45.78
54.22
36.29
57.54
LA-05
124,119
209,705
36.69
61.98
40.04
59.96
32.98
60.31
LA-06
103,071
225,094
30.90
67.49
33.04
66.96
32.45
62.02
The full precinct-by-precinct dataset, courtesy of Google Docs, is available here.
If you aren't familiar with the contours of the new map, you can take a look here. In a nutshell, the 1st remains the New Orleans suburbs, the 2nd remains New Orleans proper (although now it reaches into Baton Rouge's African-American neighborhoods as well), the 4th is still centered on Shreveport, the 5th is still Monroe and Alexandria, and the 6th is still centered on Baton Rouge (even if its core is now missing). The big difference is the 3rd, which now mostly occupies what used to be the 7th, across Lake Charles and Lafayette; the old 3rd, in Cajun country south of New Orleans, has been parceled out to the 1st, new 3rd/former 7th, and also the 6th and 2nd.
As you can see, the redistricting result is very, very likely to result in a 5-1 map. The friendliest district for Dems, after the 2nd, is now the Shreveport-based 4th, but even it didn't even see Barack Obama hit 40%. That's not much different from the current setup (where he did hit 40%); the old 6th was the friendliest for Dems, but barely more so (with 41% for Obama).
Greg Giroux has some other interesting tidbits available on how the 3rd district (which is now poised to become a battleground between incumbent GOPers Charles Boustany and Jeff Landry) got neatly dismantled: Boustany represents 575K of the 3rd's residents, while Landry represents only 180K of them, a nearly 3:1 advantage for Boustany. Of the old 3rd, 29% of it wound up in LA-01, 28% in new LA-03, 24% in LA-06, and 18% in LA-02. (The Daily Kingfish has picked up on this, and speculates that Landry might be better off challenging Steve Scalise in the 1st instead.)
After tweaking this district all evening, I am stumped. Are there any obvious batch of Democrats I am missing? I want to save southern Montgomery and Macoupin Counties for bolstering the 12th. I suppose I could always go into Fulton County, but then I would have to replace those Democrats with other voters for my new 17th. Coles County with Mattoon and Charleston might be another possibility, but if you are going mainly by Kerry 2004 results (which I am - the 2008 Obama results are just too rosy everywhere in the state although not as bad in the central and southern part of the state as in the Chicago metro area), Kerry lost that county quite handily in 2004. Either way you look at it, because both Springfield and Bloomington-Normal in a neutral year (like 2004) are lean-GOP cities, even with the powerhouses of Urbana-Champaign, Decatur, and the lean-Democratic cities of Peoria and Dansville, you still end up no better than 51.41% Kerry (at least at my valiant attempt at it).
Any thoughts of how I should try to bolster this district to 52-53% Kerry. That is my goal for creating 3 downstate lean-Democratic seats. I got Jerry Costello's district up to 53-46 simply by axing out Williamson, Union, Pulaski, and Alexander and adding in the town of Edwardsville in Madison County and bits of southern Macoupin and Montgomeryt counties. Likewise it is easy to make the 17th into a 53-47 Kerry district by going into Rockford.
This district for what it's worth, voted 59-40 for Obama in 2008 but only 51-48 for Kerry 4 years prior. I suspect the reason has largely to do with turnout issues among minorities and college students. We won't have those worries in 2012 but I worry about the remaining 4 election cycles.
I would still advocate drawing this map, even if it is not possible to go higher than 51-48. Other than Dick Durbin (who represented Springfield and Decatur when he was in the House), these cities as far as I know have never been a) brought together; or b) represented by a Democrat. Instead Illinois suffers from decades' worth of GOP gerrymanders with the result that these cities are always split up.
Still, if Democrats get a bit skittish, I would not be entirely surprised if they sought to bolster the 17th a bit more as well as the 12th at the expense of a new district.
This is my first foray into the redistricting game, so I decided to use my adoptive home state of Wisconsin. I tried to create the most Democratic map possible while maintaining reasonably compact districts and for the most part respecting communities of interest. The result was a map that should go 5-3 democratic in all but the very worst of years.
Yesterday afternoon the 12 maps were released by the Joint Committee on Redistricting. The committee has also been tagged as the "Kumbaya Committee" for it's attempt to bring bipartisanshippyness to the most partisan issue possible.
Of the 12 maps, 6 were brought forward by the Democrats on the Committee and 6 from the Republicans. All 6 Democratic maps followed a similar pattern of keeping whole cities intact as well as entire rural counties and were appropriately named "city integrity". The Republican maps all stayed close to the current map, probably realizing that's the best deal they could get at this point.
Several of the changes from both maps incorporated the wishes of different constituencies in the hearings the committee held all over the state. The biggest wish "Keep us separate from Boulder." Other major wishes included putting Grand and Chaffee counties in the 3rd (or at least not in their current 2nd and 5th CDs) and keeping the city and county of Denver whole (which is a shame).
I've only included 1 map from each side as the other 5 on both sides are similar to them and change only a county or city here and there.
A few days ago in the discussion of the proposed Louisiana map someone drew a map with two majority-black districts but nothing else filled in. I drew this map to see (a) if I could get the New Orleans district to be more compact and (b) what the other districts would look like. As it turns out, the answer to (a) is yes, but it's plurality black as opposed to majority black, and the answer to (b) is ugly.
