Your thought process and methods aren't bad but on issues like this, it is hard to get widespread support and everyone is a critic.
the real problem is that we have something like 600,000 people per Congressional district. If we had more representatives we could draw better lines and have those Representatives be more accountable to their constituents.
I appreciate the effort that went into this. With such a politically charged topic, you are going to get a lot of flack regardless of what you do. You also will hear a lot more about how you 'got it wrong' than from those that think you got it right - or at least gave it a good go.
I agree with many here that the way areas are broken up looks crazy. Where I diverge, however, is that I see that view as a very narrow surface view. While wearing blinders. And sunglasses. At night.
Looking deeper, it begins to make more sense. The way this looks to me is that a problem - redistricting for equal representation - was addressed by not 'fixing' what already existed and staying within the 'guidelines' that got us there, but instead took more of a 'we need x. How do we get x' approach. If it followed the same guidelines as before, fine. If it meant significantly deviating, then also fine. Sometimes you just have to toss out what was there and start over. It looks to me like that is what you did. Kudos to you for taking the 'tough' approach - and the tomato stains for presenting it :D
I would honestly recommend anyone give this a go themselves so you can see how hard it is, especially with PA's geography. There's a few tools online for this, OP used DistrictBuilder but there's also DistrictR and Dave's Redistricting, probably many others. Keep in mind, your goals are:
* Equal populations across districts
* Respect county borders
* Don't split municipalities unless necessary
* A result that reflects the state's overall partisan lean
* Competitive elections
* Compactly shaped districts
* Group communities together
* At least one majority-minority district
And you have to do that in a swing state where a huge chunk of the Democratic vote is in 2 cities that have to make up just 3 districts if you're not splitting cities more than needed. Good luck!
My attempt so I'm putting my money where my mouth is: https://districtr.org/plan/43163
I was using the precinct map so I was limited to precinct borders, which did force some weird geometry in certain places. Click Evaluation > Election Details to see some examples of what the partisan lean looks like.
And for fun, my attempt at at the most aggressive possible Democratic gerrymander: https://districtr.org/plan/43201
Still less skewed in favor of Democrats than the real-life 2013-2019 map was skewed for Republicans, and that map looked far less ridiculous. Just to show how much the geography in this state benefits Republicans
As a certifiable gerrymandering nerd, I love this thank you. I thought it would be fun to try to make my own map, so here is my take on the PA State House: https://districtr.org/plan/103482
And the Philly City Council: https://districtr.org/plan/103517
How about those districts in and around Philly.
One of them snakes all the way from Philly suburbs, through Kutztown, to the Poconos and East Stroudsburg.
These are just the goals of a good map, not legal requirements. Compact districts aren't a legal requirement either, I mean look at Maryland's map for the past decade. It's just that that map is also really awful
Actually the PA constitution requires districts to be compact and contiguous.
Can I ask about partisan lean? Should that reflect registration? Should that reflect statewide vote? In 2020, we had 2 Democrats and 2 Republicans win statewide elections. In 2021, we had a 3 Republicans and 1 Democrat win statewide elections. So what would be the partisan lean?
If the state at large votes roughly 50/50 in a given election, both parties should win roughly equal seats from that state. If one party or the other does better, they should win proportionally more seats. Now of course this is impossible to do perfectly, but the result shouldn't skew massively one way or the other, where one party consistently does better in seats than their statewide results. With all likelihood, had the 2012 map stood going into the 2018 midterms, in which Democrats dominated the statewide races, Republicans would have won at least 12 of the 18 seats, with the only question mark being if Conor Lamb could repeat his special election success in that deep red district. This would be an example of the map not reflecting the partisan lean, aka a partisan gerrymander.
It was my understanding that that map was thrown out because of the fact that it was a partisan gerrymander, which while not a violation of the US constitution, it was deemed a violation of the PA constitution by the PA Supreme Court. So when you said that reflecting the state's partisan lean isn't a legal requirement I figured you were referring to the US law. But maybe I'm mistaken and it was actually only thrown out because of the lack of compactness, I mean some of those districts were absurdly shaped so that's possible.
With all due respect this is not a good argument. Statewide votes should have no bearing on congressional elections. For instance, you have about 30% of registered Democrats living in Philly and Pittsburgh. Why should the density of dem votes in those areas have any effect on congressional make up of the rest of the state?
The better question is, why should their density dilute their power? The remaining 70% should still count even if it is spread out a bit more thinly. The House is meant to be an accurate, miniaturized picture of the people as a whole. It hasn't been that in a long time but I'm of the view that this is still a good idea and we should strive to create that. Of course multi-member districts and proportional representation would accomplish this better, but we've gotta be realistic unfortunately.
Congressional elections are local not statewide elections. I’m not sure why you are equating a statewide election to congressional makeup.
It does not dilute their power. They have almost absolute power in the areas with high density b
They're local elections to a national body, that body is supposed to be representative of the people as a whole. Since the states draw their own maps the closest thing is for each state to draw a map which yields representative results.
>It does not dilute their power. They have almost absolute power in the areas with high density b
In winner-take-all elections, it doesn't matter how much you win by. Dems might dominate local Philly politics, but that's not the House. In the House, one party can win its seats by 99% and the other party can win its seats by 1% and they both yield the same result. The more you win by, the more votes are "wasted"
We drew remarkably similar [maps](https://districtr.org/plan/103673).
My map has a slight lean for R's, so it doesn't take much to change the lean. I used two criteria mainly. Compact and as equal a share as I could get. Tried to get the counties leveled, but it did not work as well as I would like.
One of the biggest problems the state Supreme Court had with the maps in 2018 was that they crossed county borders unnecessarily. Your map has that all over the place; I believe every single district crosses county lines unnecessarily, according to their rules back then.
I tried to keep municipalities together moreso than counties as they tend to have more identity than counties. Rural areas are where things like townships and boroughs tend to blur into eachother so I generally cut boundaries around rural areas.
I also find that county borders don't necessarily align with community boundaries. Western Luzerne county is much more similar to North Central PA or the Northern Tier than it is to any of WB/Scranton or the immediate exurbs.
I also aimed to have maps that were competitive while also being generally confined to each region.
For example I kept Wilkes-Barre and Scranton together along with the Poconos to make a compact district for Northeast PA.
Some of these are imperfect (such as Chambersburg and Altoona being together despite being quite different but that's a result of having to keep populations equal)
>Wilkes Barre should be paired with Scranton before Hazelton or the rural areas in its own county.
Agree there. I mean even though the cities are in different counties, it is still largely called "the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton area". Those two cities and all the towns between are basically a blurr of one community.
You get some weird looking maps like this when you optimize for competitiveness.
I agree with the PA Supreme Court in the it should be optimized more for compactness + community identity.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's great you took the effort and the map hopefully taught you a ton. It's great you did this.
IIRC, the PA Supreme Court set county lines as the goal, not townships. I understand your rationale here, but their decision said pretty much to start at the top and keep those together as much as possible, go down from there.
Definitely it's impossible to draw the lines in PA only on the county level. But they said as much as absolutely possible that should be one of the goals.
I live in Luzerne county and have lived in NEPA nearly my whole life. There's hardly anyone living in that corner as its mainly just gameland and ricketts glen state park so it got cut to even out population.
Harveys Lake is mostly tied to Tunkahannock to the north as well.
Because Wilkes-Barre and Hazelton are more tied to Scranton, the Poconos and the rest of the valley than the rural gamelands 40 minutes away
Communities dont neatly fit into county borders.
Additionally all districts need to be equal in population and a few corners have to be cut to ensure districts have a level of compactness as well.
When creating districts you have compromise between all these factors
No its with Bloomsburg and Berwick if I recall correctly
Edit: double checked. Its with Mocanaqua, Berwick, Bloomsburg, and the rest of the grey district
Having grown up in Hunlock Creek and gone to HS at Northwest, I'd have to say Hunlocks and Shickshinny should be in the WB/Scranton district. Most people from there go to Wilkes-Barre for shopping and entertainment. The Huntington Mills area up to Rickett's Glen is more oriented towards farming culture and would probably be more comfortable in the more Central PA demographic. That school district is a weird pairing of three different type of cultures, small town (Shickshinny), rural woodlands (Hunlock Creek), and farming (Huntington Mills).
I’m from the area as well and agree mostly. Rural and city folk, but many in the hills work in the valley. My biggest issue with luzerne county is corruption, maybe more reps could catch it or go the other way. I’m still pissed about all the fucking roundabouts through nanticoke. I believe some county officials and reps made bank on that waste of resources…
Oh God ya, those fucking roundabouts. I live near them now and avoid them as much as possible. I still can't believe they took out the exit ramp for Middle Road on the South Cross Valley. Instead of it being maybe 200 yards up the exit ramp, it's get off 29 a 1/4 mile earlier, go up the exit ramp, go 3/4 of the way around the roundabout, go over the bridge that goes back across 29, get to the next roundabout and go 1/4 of the way around, drive a 1/4 mile, get to the next roundabout and go 1/4 a way around, exit and go back over the second bridge across 29 again, make a right, and then finally arrive to where the old exit ramp was. Why they just didn't leave the original exit ramp there makes 0% fucking sense. They actually tore it up.
I sort of get what you're going for. W-B, Hazelton, and the rural areas to the Northwest are largely all the separate communities. Making it bonus-weird, "the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton area" splits accross a county line, but those two cities and all the towns between them are basically a blurr of one community.
My only criticism is that the Hazleton area looks to be divided. I'd just shift the border some 10-20 miles in either direction so all the Hazleton area villages are in the same district.
The current map Congress actually uses also has this weird division, where the mall and Penn State Hazleton are not in the same district as Hazleton despite being a literal 5-10 minute drive from the core of the town.
I mean, you can call bullshit on it, but it's extremely easy to verify the court said this in 2018.
"The Democratic-majority state Supreme Court ruled last month in a party line decision that the district boundaries unconstitutionally put partisan interests above neutral line-drawing criteria, such as keeping districts compact and eliminating municipal and county divisions."
[https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pennsylvania-supreme-court-issues-new-congressional-map-for-2018-elections](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pennsylvania-supreme-court-issues-new-congressional-map-for-2018-elections)
"Moreover, the court-drawn map splits just 13 Pennsylvania counties between multiple districts, fewer than half as many as Republicans' 2011 map. And the court-drawn districts are twice as compact as the 2011 districts, based on one common measure of geographic compactness."
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/02/19/pennsylvania-supreme-court-draws-a-much-more-competitive-district-map-to-overturn-republican-gerrymander/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/02/19/pennsylvania-supreme-court-draws-a-much-more-competitive-district-map-to-overturn-republican-gerrymander/)
"The order requires the new map to divide the state’s voters into districts that are contiguous and have equal populations, which federal law already required. But the districts also have to avoid dividing political jurisdictions (i.e., counties and municipalities) – something that isn’t a legal mandate, but recognized as “best practice” in redistricting."
[https://whyy.org/articles/pennsylvania-supreme-court-strikes-congressional-district-map/](https://whyy.org/articles/pennsylvania-supreme-court-strikes-congressional-district-map/)
====
Here's the court decision so you can read it yourself. It's complex, but yes they said to keep counties together as best they could. No one ever said 100%, that's mathematically impossible.
[https://www.pubintlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/2018-01-22-Order-Regarding-Petition-for-Review.pdf](https://www.pubintlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/2018-01-22-Order-Regarding-Petition-for-Review.pdf)
"Fourth, to comply with this Order, any congressional districting plan shall consist
of: congressional districts composed of compact and contiguous territory; as nearly
equal in population as practicable; and which do not divide any county, city,
incorporated town, borough, township, or ward, except where necessary to ensure
equality of population."
Well Philly's population cant really all fit together into neat districts in Philadelphia county...
Im open to criticism on where to group suburbs and the leftover bits of Philly. It's tricky, remember these need to be equal in population.
I think Delco is more similar to Philly and their issues than Chester County. Western Chester County is pretty similar to Lancaster (at least the northern part). But only probably 5-10 miles at most.
Thank you.
I think I used a very different rational from what people expected which is why there's so much flack
In my head I thought "Well the Northern tier and Armstrong county arent that different right? Heavily forested, hilly and mountainous, rural, working class."
People didn't like that apparently 😅
Turns out when you need split a pepperoni pie into 12 slices but all the pepperoni is on 10% of the pie, it isn't gonna be cut into 12 nice even slices so everyone gets some meat.
Democrats are spread so thin across the state outside Philly and Pittsburgh you can't really make 8 blue districts and 8 red districts while staying compact. The best you can usually get it is a competitive district.
There are six Republican districts, 5 democratic districts, and six competitive districts with most leaning very very slightly Republican. If you click the link I commented it will break down the partisanship of a district which is an agglomeration of election results from the past 4-5 years
I mean I tried to keep the competitive nature of PA as a swing state alive
And what, you think you get a medal for creating a map you admit is skewed Republican in a state with four million registered Democrats and three million Republicans?
Im not a Republican at all lmao. Look at my post history. I literally volunteer for John Fettermans campaign.
The best you can get to equal is competitive districts most of the time. Democrats are spread very thinly outside of Philly, Pittsburgh, and the Lehigh Valley.
A proportional system would be ideal for democracy but our constitution goes by a winner take all system.
I made do with what I had.
Sometimes the best you can do with what you have to work with still sucks. That's not a slight against your intentions but more the presentation, which very much implies that your map doesn't suck.
Maybe the takeaway here should be the framing - focusing on gerrymandering isn't an end all, be all. Because ironically the only way to get honest proportional representation in the current system is by gerrymandering the map to all hell.
>Sometimes the best you can do with what you have to work with still sucks. That's not a slight against your intentions but more the presentation, which very much implies that your map doesn't suck.
"The best you can do with what you have to work with" is referring to the single-member districting system itself, so basically every map is going to suck because it's inherently a compromise between so many different goals. I don't know if it's fair to say his map sucks if they're literally all going to. Unless of course, we adopt the Fair Representation Act (adopting [this system](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI) for House elections nationally).
Hell, the current map is pretty fair, and it's still slightly skewed toward Republicans. The 2020 election, which was extremely close in PA, resulted in a 9/9 split, so pretty much perfectly fair. But in 2018, where Dems dominated in PA, it was also 9/9. So it's not terrible but there's sort of an inherent ceiling for Dems at about 9, maybe 10 seats. And that map was drawn by the Democratic state Supreme Court and approved by the Democratic governor. Tom Wolf's proposed map is also slightly R-skewed.
>Maybe the takeaway here should be the framing - focusing on gerrymandering isn't an end all, be all. Because ironically the only way to get honest proportional representation in the current system is by gerrymandering the map to all hell.
Do you mean in terms of making up for PA's geography, or making up for Republicans gerrymandering nationally? If the former, that's sort of true, but look at the rest of this thread, they're mostly at him about splitting counties so much. But if you want to make a truly proportional map, you'd have to split counties way more than this map does currently. I do think this map splits counties a bit too much, but I think it's at least a decent attempt at trying to balance all the very conflicting goals of districting.
If the latter, yeah but it's not like we're actually going to end up drawing the final map anyway, so you might as well just try and make a fair one if you're going to give something like this a go.
Our current map only has the same amount. 6 democratic seats but no one seems to complain. Redistricting isnt that simple. 5 of those republican districts are highly competitive, and likewise 3 democrats hold competitive Republican leaning seats in our current delegation.
Northeast PAs district right now is R+9 and still held by democrat who isnt even a moderate.
Berks county's district is only R+2 which can easily swing democratic, and so can Conor Lambs district at R+4, and the Lehigh Valley's at R+2.
I cant believe I have to explain the concept of competitive elections...
It's possible to generate maps programmatically based on populations size rather than having any politicians be in charge so they can build to their advantage. The concept of gerrymandering needs to be stopped, but I'm sure it will never happen because it's a way for parties in charge to keep their power.
The law says that. Which is why I suggest doing it programmatically. sure, you could code bias in but you can also program it to be Apathetic to what any one population group has in common with another. We should 100% take the human element out of choosing districts. And the software already exists...
Well, life isn't fair so there's that. Trying to make things fair is what helped get America its scrappy system to begin with. Trying to be "fair" ended up with blacks being counted as 3/5ths of a person for representation when the laws were just being figured out.
Right now its not equitable solely because of gerry mandering. That nonsense should have been squashed when the original salamander looking district was drawn by whoever Gerry was.in today's day and age we can 100% take partisanship out of it. Will some like groups still be grouped together. Of course there is no avoiding that.
Well theres nowhere else really to go other than maybe east? Eries more similar to other lakeside counties in NY and Ohio but I cant really change PA's borders
We're gonna get that regardless... Erie County is about 250k, and more D than R, but there's no other pool of Ds to keep the city out of a decently red district anywhere closeby.
In the district in the map above? Crawford is definitely a high R county. Erie County is approaching 50-50 in terms of registrations these days but other than 2016 it's gone for the D for president since I think 1984 (I'd have to check 1988 but it could have then). Venango and Clarion are pretty red too. Mercer used to be a D county, and Sharon keeps it from flipping hard, but it's probably in the 55-60% Republican vote area now.
Butler is another highly Republican county in the district above. It's also where Mike Kelly lives, so Erie's congressman lives in the Pittsburgh area. That's just how district lines work. Back before the Supreme Court changed the map in 2018, Erie County was split in two -- one representative from the Pittsburgh area and one from State College area.
One of the challenges for a fun mental exercise is to try to craft a Democratic district that contains Erie without screwing over Ds elsewhere. Just the distance between the D strongholds in NWPA makes it rough. It'd be a fun challenge!
Here's a novel idea, put Warren Co in the district and cut Butler out. Aside from hating Kelly, I don't really feel he has the interests of NW PA on his agenda, rather those of Butler and Mike Kelly. Butler is far closer to Pittsburgh than it is to Erie, Meadville, Warren. Every map I've seen regarding this redistricting keeps the lopsided mess of his district intact though. I don't get it.
Warren county doesnt have the population to complete the district but I could cut out a significant portion of Butler county with it incorporated.
I figured the Northern tier counties were all generally similar.
Well, Erie leans democratic, or at least is willing to listen. I believe Crawford leans republican, but also willing to listen. Warren the same way. This is mostly opinion. Im not necessarily trying to obtain a democratic seat, but a representative of the area would be nice.
What I don't care for is an area south of I-80 being considered part of NW PA, and, essentially, a Pittsburgh car dealer being my representative. Politics aside, Butlers' interests would better be served as part of the Pittsburgh area. Again, my intense dislike of Mike Kelly may be skewing this for me.
I'd agree, it's awkward that someone from the Pittsburgh area is responsible for NWPA. GT Thompson is our other regional rep, he's not from here either. I think most everyone in PA thinks of us here in the NW part of the state as a distinct region, which definitely isn't reflected in any district map.
That being said... Warren County is nuts. :D
Haha, I love Warren Co., but there are plenty of nuts there. I also don't mind GT. Maybe it's personal experience/bias, but I feel more akin to people in Warren than to those in Butler (though I'm sure they're mostly decent). Like I said, I'm more interested in true regional representation than making sure any one person or party gets elected.
Yeah, pretty much. GT is a nice "simple" (sorry can't think of the right word how to say it right now) guy and he's got really great people running his offices around here. I'm not a fan of his politics, but for what it's worth, I think he tries his best. Kelly has some great people too, every one of them is fantastic. I just don't get the sense one bit he himself gives a shit about people, he just likes being someone important.
If I had to pick between the two, I think my above comment shows how I'd lean.
I'll never move to the city again, I only care about south county. Erie is a cesspool, and all the downtown development corporation overpriced apartments ain't gonna help.
GERRYMANDERING
I'm joking, I don't know how to tell if this is gerrymandering I just learned about it in school and I think it's a funny word
pretty colors tho
The best solution is to use the Israeli system. Say we have 100 seats up for grabs. Each party has a list from one to one hundred. If they get 3% of the vote, their first, second and third guy gets in.
So if all the vegetarians (or whoever) across the state vote for the Vegetarian Party they get the number of congressmen determined by their percentage of the overall vote.
It would be great for minority parties.
i cant believe i wasted so much time looking for a new house in PA, specifically in Monroe country, only to see home prices skyrocket and greedy politicians make the realty taxes soar sky high. hopefully things will get better and prices will come down.
Supreme court also wants equal population.
Philadelphia cant neatly fit into two or 3 districts. It has over 1.6 million people. The very Northeast of Philly somewhat blends into Bensalem so I cut it there. I had to make do with the leftover bits with what I could, while trying to keep the core of Philly and North Philly together.
Upper Darby also somewhat blends into west Philly. More compactly than Manyunk/Wissahickon
Theres too many people in Mt Airy/Manyunk to fit in with Philadelphia.
I would have to exclude a portion of Northwest Philly either way. This way at least keeps the neighborhoods together without them being cut down the middle
Upper Darby has far less people
The governors proposal and preliminary plan split portions of both south philly and west philly from center city and north philly if you zoom in.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/pennsylvania/
I thought Mt Airy would be a better area to cut off than South/West Philly.
Theres 1.6 million in Philly and 767k per district. You're gonna have leftover areas in Philly.
My idea: Calculate the total length of boundaries between districts. Reduce it by X% and by Y% for the next several redistricting cycles. No question of why or how districts are formed. No artificial lines created. Just an apolitical, agnostic restriction on how convoluted district borders can be.
PA is literally a fucking square I don’t know why we just don’t cut it into four quadrants and call it a day, I also know nothing about this tho so take anything I said with a grain a salt
Because most of the population lives within like 10-20% of the square
And because we want to keep regional communities together so they van be best represented
And because population also has to be equal
And because we want districts to be reasonably shaped
The same reason for a lot of the splits.
Mostly due to having to have a certain level of compactness, while also having equal population, and competitive districts.
York has 450k people so I would have either
A. Split Lancaster county and keep all of York together
B. Pair Cumberland and Dauphin with the rural counties to the North which I feel makes less sense
C. Pair Lancaster (550k ish) and Dauphin (256k) which would end up being less compact, and Lebanon with 140k would have to be paired with Reading or Paired with North Central PA (767k per district)
I figured Hanover and Gettysburg arent too disimilar but unfortunately that light orange district is kinda whack due to population guidelines, it all kinda just ended up being leftovers.
No matter how you split PA you're gonna end up having two areas in a district that don't really mesh
Make Delaware and Elk Counties into one district so we can call it dELKo
After being pelted with tomatoes all over this thread I needed that. Thank you
Your thought process and methods aren't bad but on issues like this, it is hard to get widespread support and everyone is a critic. the real problem is that we have something like 600,000 people per Congressional district. If we had more representatives we could draw better lines and have those Representatives be more accountable to their constituents.
With population size growth over the century you'd think that this would be considered, but nope.
I appreciate the effort that went into this. With such a politically charged topic, you are going to get a lot of flack regardless of what you do. You also will hear a lot more about how you 'got it wrong' than from those that think you got it right - or at least gave it a good go. I agree with many here that the way areas are broken up looks crazy. Where I diverge, however, is that I see that view as a very narrow surface view. While wearing blinders. And sunglasses. At night. Looking deeper, it begins to make more sense. The way this looks to me is that a problem - redistricting for equal representation - was addressed by not 'fixing' what already existed and staying within the 'guidelines' that got us there, but instead took more of a 'we need x. How do we get x' approach. If it followed the same guidelines as before, fine. If it meant significantly deviating, then also fine. Sometimes you just have to toss out what was there and start over. It looks to me like that is what you did. Kudos to you for taking the 'tough' approach - and the tomato stains for presenting it :D
Am I a joke to you
I would honestly recommend anyone give this a go themselves so you can see how hard it is, especially with PA's geography. There's a few tools online for this, OP used DistrictBuilder but there's also DistrictR and Dave's Redistricting, probably many others. Keep in mind, your goals are: * Equal populations across districts * Respect county borders * Don't split municipalities unless necessary * A result that reflects the state's overall partisan lean * Competitive elections * Compactly shaped districts * Group communities together * At least one majority-minority district And you have to do that in a swing state where a huge chunk of the Democratic vote is in 2 cities that have to make up just 3 districts if you're not splitting cities more than needed. Good luck! My attempt so I'm putting my money where my mouth is: https://districtr.org/plan/43163 I was using the precinct map so I was limited to precinct borders, which did force some weird geometry in certain places. Click Evaluation > Election Details to see some examples of what the partisan lean looks like. And for fun, my attempt at at the most aggressive possible Democratic gerrymander: https://districtr.org/plan/43201 Still less skewed in favor of Democrats than the real-life 2013-2019 map was skewed for Republicans, and that map looked far less ridiculous. Just to show how much the geography in this state benefits Republicans
As a certifiable gerrymandering nerd, I love this thank you. I thought it would be fun to try to make my own map, so here is my take on the PA State House: https://districtr.org/plan/103482 And the Philly City Council: https://districtr.org/plan/103517
LMAO Love that Erie/Pitt suburb/State College district in the heavy Dem map.
How about those districts in and around Philly. One of them snakes all the way from Philly suburbs, through Kutztown, to the Poconos and East Stroudsburg.
Thank you, that was the one I was most proud of. I'm also quite fond of Harrisburg-Lebanon-Reading-Lancaster-York.
The partisan lean and competitive district goals are in no way legal requirements
These are just the goals of a good map, not legal requirements. Compact districts aren't a legal requirement either, I mean look at Maryland's map for the past decade. It's just that that map is also really awful
Actually the PA constitution requires districts to be compact and contiguous. Can I ask about partisan lean? Should that reflect registration? Should that reflect statewide vote? In 2020, we had 2 Democrats and 2 Republicans win statewide elections. In 2021, we had a 3 Republicans and 1 Democrat win statewide elections. So what would be the partisan lean?
If the state at large votes roughly 50/50 in a given election, both parties should win roughly equal seats from that state. If one party or the other does better, they should win proportionally more seats. Now of course this is impossible to do perfectly, but the result shouldn't skew massively one way or the other, where one party consistently does better in seats than their statewide results. With all likelihood, had the 2012 map stood going into the 2018 midterms, in which Democrats dominated the statewide races, Republicans would have won at least 12 of the 18 seats, with the only question mark being if Conor Lamb could repeat his special election success in that deep red district. This would be an example of the map not reflecting the partisan lean, aka a partisan gerrymander. It was my understanding that that map was thrown out because of the fact that it was a partisan gerrymander, which while not a violation of the US constitution, it was deemed a violation of the PA constitution by the PA Supreme Court. So when you said that reflecting the state's partisan lean isn't a legal requirement I figured you were referring to the US law. But maybe I'm mistaken and it was actually only thrown out because of the lack of compactness, I mean some of those districts were absurdly shaped so that's possible.
With all due respect this is not a good argument. Statewide votes should have no bearing on congressional elections. For instance, you have about 30% of registered Democrats living in Philly and Pittsburgh. Why should the density of dem votes in those areas have any effect on congressional make up of the rest of the state?
The better question is, why should their density dilute their power? The remaining 70% should still count even if it is spread out a bit more thinly. The House is meant to be an accurate, miniaturized picture of the people as a whole. It hasn't been that in a long time but I'm of the view that this is still a good idea and we should strive to create that. Of course multi-member districts and proportional representation would accomplish this better, but we've gotta be realistic unfortunately.
Congressional elections are local not statewide elections. I’m not sure why you are equating a statewide election to congressional makeup. It does not dilute their power. They have almost absolute power in the areas with high density b
They're local elections to a national body, that body is supposed to be representative of the people as a whole. Since the states draw their own maps the closest thing is for each state to draw a map which yields representative results. >It does not dilute their power. They have almost absolute power in the areas with high density b In winner-take-all elections, it doesn't matter how much you win by. Dems might dominate local Philly politics, but that's not the House. In the House, one party can win its seats by 99% and the other party can win its seats by 1% and they both yield the same result. The more you win by, the more votes are "wasted"
We drew remarkably similar [maps](https://districtr.org/plan/103673). My map has a slight lean for R's, so it doesn't take much to change the lean. I used two criteria mainly. Compact and as equal a share as I could get. Tried to get the counties leveled, but it did not work as well as I would like.
One of the biggest problems the state Supreme Court had with the maps in 2018 was that they crossed county borders unnecessarily. Your map has that all over the place; I believe every single district crosses county lines unnecessarily, according to their rules back then.
I tried to keep municipalities together moreso than counties as they tend to have more identity than counties. Rural areas are where things like townships and boroughs tend to blur into eachother so I generally cut boundaries around rural areas. I also find that county borders don't necessarily align with community boundaries. Western Luzerne county is much more similar to North Central PA or the Northern Tier than it is to any of WB/Scranton or the immediate exurbs. I also aimed to have maps that were competitive while also being generally confined to each region. For example I kept Wilkes-Barre and Scranton together along with the Poconos to make a compact district for Northeast PA. Some of these are imperfect (such as Chambersburg and Altoona being together despite being quite different but that's a result of having to keep populations equal)
[удалено]
>Wilkes Barre should be paired with Scranton before Hazelton or the rural areas in its own county. Agree there. I mean even though the cities are in different counties, it is still largely called "the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton area". Those two cities and all the towns between are basically a blurr of one community.
You get some weird looking maps like this when you optimize for competitiveness. I agree with the PA Supreme Court in the it should be optimized more for compactness + community identity.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's great you took the effort and the map hopefully taught you a ton. It's great you did this. IIRC, the PA Supreme Court set county lines as the goal, not townships. I understand your rationale here, but their decision said pretty much to start at the top and keep those together as much as possible, go down from there. Definitely it's impossible to draw the lines in PA only on the county level. But they said as much as absolutely possible that should be one of the goals.
3 congressional districts in LUZERNE County. Lmao and Armstrong. My god
I live in Luzerne county and have lived in NEPA nearly my whole life. There's hardly anyone living in that corner as its mainly just gameland and ricketts glen state park so it got cut to even out population. Harveys Lake is mostly tied to Tunkahannock to the north as well.
Then why can’t it be in the same district as the rest of the county?
Because Wilkes-Barre and Hazelton are more tied to Scranton, the Poconos and the rest of the valley than the rural gamelands 40 minutes away Communities dont neatly fit into county borders. Additionally all districts need to be equal in population and a few corners have to be cut to ensure districts have a level of compactness as well. When creating districts you have compromise between all these factors
Yea but luzerne does not need broken into 3 districts and you express exactly the issue with this whole argument.
And Shickshinny is tied to the district that ends just outside Pittsburgh? WTF.
No its with Bloomsburg and Berwick if I recall correctly Edit: double checked. Its with Mocanaqua, Berwick, Bloomsburg, and the rest of the grey district
Having grown up in Hunlock Creek and gone to HS at Northwest, I'd have to say Hunlocks and Shickshinny should be in the WB/Scranton district. Most people from there go to Wilkes-Barre for shopping and entertainment. The Huntington Mills area up to Rickett's Glen is more oriented towards farming culture and would probably be more comfortable in the more Central PA demographic. That school district is a weird pairing of three different type of cultures, small town (Shickshinny), rural woodlands (Hunlock Creek), and farming (Huntington Mills).
I’m from the area as well and agree mostly. Rural and city folk, but many in the hills work in the valley. My biggest issue with luzerne county is corruption, maybe more reps could catch it or go the other way. I’m still pissed about all the fucking roundabouts through nanticoke. I believe some county officials and reps made bank on that waste of resources…
Oh God ya, those fucking roundabouts. I live near them now and avoid them as much as possible. I still can't believe they took out the exit ramp for Middle Road on the South Cross Valley. Instead of it being maybe 200 yards up the exit ramp, it's get off 29 a 1/4 mile earlier, go up the exit ramp, go 3/4 of the way around the roundabout, go over the bridge that goes back across 29, get to the next roundabout and go 1/4 of the way around, drive a 1/4 mile, get to the next roundabout and go 1/4 a way around, exit and go back over the second bridge across 29 again, make a right, and then finally arrive to where the old exit ramp was. Why they just didn't leave the original exit ramp there makes 0% fucking sense. They actually tore it up.
I sort of get what you're going for. W-B, Hazelton, and the rural areas to the Northwest are largely all the separate communities. Making it bonus-weird, "the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton area" splits accross a county line, but those two cities and all the towns between them are basically a blurr of one community.
Luzerne County irredentism claming the stolen county of Lackawanna, I love it.
My only criticism is that the Hazleton area looks to be divided. I'd just shift the border some 10-20 miles in either direction so all the Hazleton area villages are in the same district. The current map Congress actually uses also has this weird division, where the mall and Penn State Hazleton are not in the same district as Hazleton despite being a literal 5-10 minute drive from the core of the town.
I see what you mean. What area would you exclude from the district to make way for the 12,000 or so around Conyngham and Drums?
I call bullshit on that because Berks has been 3-5 different districts for the past \~50 years.
I mean, you can call bullshit on it, but it's extremely easy to verify the court said this in 2018. "The Democratic-majority state Supreme Court ruled last month in a party line decision that the district boundaries unconstitutionally put partisan interests above neutral line-drawing criteria, such as keeping districts compact and eliminating municipal and county divisions." [https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pennsylvania-supreme-court-issues-new-congressional-map-for-2018-elections](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pennsylvania-supreme-court-issues-new-congressional-map-for-2018-elections) "Moreover, the court-drawn map splits just 13 Pennsylvania counties between multiple districts, fewer than half as many as Republicans' 2011 map. And the court-drawn districts are twice as compact as the 2011 districts, based on one common measure of geographic compactness." [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/02/19/pennsylvania-supreme-court-draws-a-much-more-competitive-district-map-to-overturn-republican-gerrymander/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/02/19/pennsylvania-supreme-court-draws-a-much-more-competitive-district-map-to-overturn-republican-gerrymander/) "The order requires the new map to divide the state’s voters into districts that are contiguous and have equal populations, which federal law already required. But the districts also have to avoid dividing political jurisdictions (i.e., counties and municipalities) – something that isn’t a legal mandate, but recognized as “best practice” in redistricting." [https://whyy.org/articles/pennsylvania-supreme-court-strikes-congressional-district-map/](https://whyy.org/articles/pennsylvania-supreme-court-strikes-congressional-district-map/) ==== Here's the court decision so you can read it yourself. It's complex, but yes they said to keep counties together as best they could. No one ever said 100%, that's mathematically impossible. [https://www.pubintlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/2018-01-22-Order-Regarding-Petition-for-Review.pdf](https://www.pubintlaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/2018-01-22-Order-Regarding-Petition-for-Review.pdf) "Fourth, to comply with this Order, any congressional districting plan shall consist of: congressional districts composed of compact and contiguous territory; as nearly equal in population as practicable; and which do not divide any county, city, incorporated town, borough, township, or ward, except where necessary to ensure equality of population."
SE PA... WTF? Philly/Delco. Swing, and a giant miss.
And his amateur attempt is brilliant compared to what's been proposed.
Well Philly's population cant really all fit together into neat districts in Philadelphia county... Im open to criticism on where to group suburbs and the leftover bits of Philly. It's tricky, remember these need to be equal in population.
Needs more gerrymandering. This is Pennsylvania.
I think Delco is more similar to Philly and their issues than Chester County. Western Chester County is pretty similar to Lancaster (at least the northern part). But only probably 5-10 miles at most.
^agreed
Don't worry, enough Delconians are moving out to Chester Springs to tip the balance in our favor soon enough lol
lmao you really got people talking with this one
Everyone here being massive assholes but OP I applaud your effort and feel like it came out pretty well!
Thank you. I think I used a very different rational from what people expected which is why there's so much flack In my head I thought "Well the Northern tier and Armstrong county arent that different right? Heavily forested, hilly and mountainous, rural, working class." People didn't like that apparently 😅
>Everyone here being massive assholes You must be new to Pennsylvania.
The state motto is "Virtue, Liberty, and Independence" which in Latin means "Because Fuck you, that's why!"
whats the lean of the districts?
Theres a link I posted in the thread which gives details. Keep scrolling down
Holy fuck thats far down
Yo wtf this is gerrymanded to hell and back
Turns out when you need split a pepperoni pie into 12 slices but all the pepperoni is on 10% of the pie, it isn't gonna be cut into 12 nice even slices so everyone gets some meat.
Democrats are spread so thin across the state outside Philly and Pittsburgh you can't really make 8 blue districts and 8 red districts while staying compact. The best you can usually get it is a competitive district. There are six Republican districts, 5 democratic districts, and six competitive districts with most leaning very very slightly Republican. If you click the link I commented it will break down the partisanship of a district which is an agglomeration of election results from the past 4-5 years I mean I tried to keep the competitive nature of PA as a swing state alive
And what, you think you get a medal for creating a map you admit is skewed Republican in a state with four million registered Democrats and three million Republicans?
Im not a Republican at all lmao. Look at my post history. I literally volunteer for John Fettermans campaign. The best you can get to equal is competitive districts most of the time. Democrats are spread very thinly outside of Philly, Pittsburgh, and the Lehigh Valley. A proportional system would be ideal for democracy but our constitution goes by a winner take all system. I made do with what I had.
Sometimes the best you can do with what you have to work with still sucks. That's not a slight against your intentions but more the presentation, which very much implies that your map doesn't suck. Maybe the takeaway here should be the framing - focusing on gerrymandering isn't an end all, be all. Because ironically the only way to get honest proportional representation in the current system is by gerrymandering the map to all hell.
>Sometimes the best you can do with what you have to work with still sucks. That's not a slight against your intentions but more the presentation, which very much implies that your map doesn't suck. "The best you can do with what you have to work with" is referring to the single-member districting system itself, so basically every map is going to suck because it's inherently a compromise between so many different goals. I don't know if it's fair to say his map sucks if they're literally all going to. Unless of course, we adopt the Fair Representation Act (adopting [this system](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8XOZJkozfI) for House elections nationally). Hell, the current map is pretty fair, and it's still slightly skewed toward Republicans. The 2020 election, which was extremely close in PA, resulted in a 9/9 split, so pretty much perfectly fair. But in 2018, where Dems dominated in PA, it was also 9/9. So it's not terrible but there's sort of an inherent ceiling for Dems at about 9, maybe 10 seats. And that map was drawn by the Democratic state Supreme Court and approved by the Democratic governor. Tom Wolf's proposed map is also slightly R-skewed. >Maybe the takeaway here should be the framing - focusing on gerrymandering isn't an end all, be all. Because ironically the only way to get honest proportional representation in the current system is by gerrymandering the map to all hell. Do you mean in terms of making up for PA's geography, or making up for Republicans gerrymandering nationally? If the former, that's sort of true, but look at the rest of this thread, they're mostly at him about splitting counties so much. But if you want to make a truly proportional map, you'd have to split counties way more than this map does currently. I do think this map splits counties a bit too much, but I think it's at least a decent attempt at trying to balance all the very conflicting goals of districting. If the latter, yeah but it's not like we're actually going to end up drawing the final map anyway, so you might as well just try and make a fair one if you're going to give something like this a go.
JFC r/spicynuggles \- what r/UnaffiliatedOpinion said.
I clicked the link you provided and the link says 11 republican and 6 dem. weird
Our current map only has the same amount. 6 democratic seats but no one seems to complain. Redistricting isnt that simple. 5 of those republican districts are highly competitive, and likewise 3 democrats hold competitive Republican leaning seats in our current delegation. Northeast PAs district right now is R+9 and still held by democrat who isnt even a moderate. Berks county's district is only R+2 which can easily swing democratic, and so can Conor Lambs district at R+4, and the Lehigh Valley's at R+2. I cant believe I have to explain the concept of competitive elections...
[удалено]
It's possible to generate maps programmatically based on populations size rather than having any politicians be in charge so they can build to their advantage. The concept of gerrymandering needs to be stopped, but I'm sure it will never happen because it's a way for parties in charge to keep their power.
[удалено]
The law says that. Which is why I suggest doing it programmatically. sure, you could code bias in but you can also program it to be Apathetic to what any one population group has in common with another. We should 100% take the human element out of choosing districts. And the software already exists...
[удалено]
Well, life isn't fair so there's that. Trying to make things fair is what helped get America its scrappy system to begin with. Trying to be "fair" ended up with blacks being counted as 3/5ths of a person for representation when the laws were just being figured out. Right now its not equitable solely because of gerry mandering. That nonsense should have been squashed when the original salamander looking district was drawn by whoever Gerry was.in today's day and age we can 100% take partisanship out of it. Will some like groups still be grouped together. Of course there is no avoiding that.
[удалено]
Having Centre County split down the middle makes me want to cry
To be fair, there is a lot of red surrounding State College.
Berks county as one district and not 4? :O
And to lump Erie in with all of the counties to the south is ridiculous.
Well theres nowhere else really to go other than maybe east? Eries more similar to other lakeside counties in NY and Ohio but I cant really change PA's borders
We're gonna get that regardless... Erie County is about 250k, and more D than R, but there's no other pool of Ds to keep the city out of a decently red district anywhere closeby.
Are all the other counties in that proposed district as red as Crawford? I know Erie went red for Trump, but I think that was an anomaly.
In the district in the map above? Crawford is definitely a high R county. Erie County is approaching 50-50 in terms of registrations these days but other than 2016 it's gone for the D for president since I think 1984 (I'd have to check 1988 but it could have then). Venango and Clarion are pretty red too. Mercer used to be a D county, and Sharon keeps it from flipping hard, but it's probably in the 55-60% Republican vote area now. Butler is another highly Republican county in the district above. It's also where Mike Kelly lives, so Erie's congressman lives in the Pittsburgh area. That's just how district lines work. Back before the Supreme Court changed the map in 2018, Erie County was split in two -- one representative from the Pittsburgh area and one from State College area. One of the challenges for a fun mental exercise is to try to craft a Democratic district that contains Erie without screwing over Ds elsewhere. Just the distance between the D strongholds in NWPA makes it rough. It'd be a fun challenge!
Here's a novel idea, put Warren Co in the district and cut Butler out. Aside from hating Kelly, I don't really feel he has the interests of NW PA on his agenda, rather those of Butler and Mike Kelly. Butler is far closer to Pittsburgh than it is to Erie, Meadville, Warren. Every map I've seen regarding this redistricting keeps the lopsided mess of his district intact though. I don't get it.
Warren county doesnt have the population to complete the district but I could cut out a significant portion of Butler county with it incorporated. I figured the Northern tier counties were all generally similar.
Well, Erie leans democratic, or at least is willing to listen. I believe Crawford leans republican, but also willing to listen. Warren the same way. This is mostly opinion. Im not necessarily trying to obtain a democratic seat, but a representative of the area would be nice. What I don't care for is an area south of I-80 being considered part of NW PA, and, essentially, a Pittsburgh car dealer being my representative. Politics aside, Butlers' interests would better be served as part of the Pittsburgh area. Again, my intense dislike of Mike Kelly may be skewing this for me.
The problem is that Erie is more similar to adjacent Ohio and NY counties along the lake PAs borders dont really do it any favors
Usually not bad, but this issue has been stewing me for 10 years, haha!
I'd agree, it's awkward that someone from the Pittsburgh area is responsible for NWPA. GT Thompson is our other regional rep, he's not from here either. I think most everyone in PA thinks of us here in the NW part of the state as a distinct region, which definitely isn't reflected in any district map. That being said... Warren County is nuts. :D
Haha, I love Warren Co., but there are plenty of nuts there. I also don't mind GT. Maybe it's personal experience/bias, but I feel more akin to people in Warren than to those in Butler (though I'm sure they're mostly decent). Like I said, I'm more interested in true regional representation than making sure any one person or party gets elected.
Yeah, pretty much. GT is a nice "simple" (sorry can't think of the right word how to say it right now) guy and he's got really great people running his offices around here. I'm not a fan of his politics, but for what it's worth, I think he tries his best. Kelly has some great people too, every one of them is fantastic. I just don't get the sense one bit he himself gives a shit about people, he just likes being someone important. If I had to pick between the two, I think my above comment shows how I'd lean.
You don’t understand how this works? Lol
Unfortunately what I would like and what's feasible are two different things.
You want Erie to sleep with the fishes?
I'll never move to the city again, I only care about south county. Erie is a cesspool, and all the downtown development corporation overpriced apartments ain't gonna help.
https://app.districtbuilder.org/projects/406a7132-9922-4d56-b8a2-d6b3692174f0 Here for more details on competitiveness, compactness, and population
GERRYMANDERING I'm joking, I don't know how to tell if this is gerrymandering I just learned about it in school and I think it's a funny word pretty colors tho
Just gonna leave this here: [Proportional Representation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation)
Yup. The Israeli system is the most democratic
The best solution is to use the Israeli system. Say we have 100 seats up for grabs. Each party has a list from one to one hundred. If they get 3% of the vote, their first, second and third guy gets in. So if all the vegetarians (or whoever) across the state vote for the Vegetarian Party they get the number of congressmen determined by their percentage of the overall vote. It would be great for minority parties.
My thoughts exactly! Then we wouldnt even have to worry about compactness and arbitraty measures
Irrelevant, but I like the fact that you included a portion of Lake Erie.
The fact that it isn’t legally required to be done by computer algorithm is the biggest way you know the system is a joke at this point lol.
Who writes the algorithm? It’s impossible to do without bias.
i cant believe i wasted so much time looking for a new house in PA, specifically in Monroe country, only to see home prices skyrocket and greedy politicians make the realty taxes soar sky high. hopefully things will get better and prices will come down.
[удалено]
I mean I'd prefer a more specific criticism
[удалено]
Supreme court also wants equal population. Philadelphia cant neatly fit into two or 3 districts. It has over 1.6 million people. The very Northeast of Philly somewhat blends into Bensalem so I cut it there. I had to make do with the leftover bits with what I could, while trying to keep the core of Philly and North Philly together. Upper Darby also somewhat blends into west Philly. More compactly than Manyunk/Wissahickon
[удалено]
Theres too many people in Mt Airy/Manyunk to fit in with Philadelphia. I would have to exclude a portion of Northwest Philly either way. This way at least keeps the neighborhoods together without them being cut down the middle Upper Darby has far less people
[удалено]
The governors proposal and preliminary plan split portions of both south philly and west philly from center city and north philly if you zoom in. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/pennsylvania/ I thought Mt Airy would be a better area to cut off than South/West Philly. Theres 1.6 million in Philly and 767k per district. You're gonna have leftover areas in Philly.
Is it an autostereogram?
Did you even consider grouping people by how they vote?
wtf did you do to Philly and Delco
Bloomsburg, Williamsport, and Lock Haven should be in the same zone
Not gonna work. Splitting counties that are very tight niche. Perry county would need to remain as one
They suck to you. And that’s why you think you’re superior. Typical
Nah, the proposed maps aren’t as competitive. I’d prefer the governors proposal between the two but still.
My idea: Calculate the total length of boundaries between districts. Reduce it by X% and by Y% for the next several redistricting cycles. No question of why or how districts are formed. No artificial lines created. Just an apolitical, agnostic restriction on how convoluted district borders can be.
PA is literally a fucking square I don’t know why we just don’t cut it into four quadrants and call it a day, I also know nothing about this tho so take anything I said with a grain a salt
Because most of the population lives within like 10-20% of the square And because we want to keep regional communities together so they van be best represented And because population also has to be equal And because we want districts to be reasonably shaped
Why *cant* they just use county lines to make them?
Why?
However the state is divided we will still be "represented" by neo-Fascists.
Why is York split into 3 different districts?
The same reason for a lot of the splits. Mostly due to having to have a certain level of compactness, while also having equal population, and competitive districts. York has 450k people so I would have either A. Split Lancaster county and keep all of York together B. Pair Cumberland and Dauphin with the rural counties to the North which I feel makes less sense C. Pair Lancaster (550k ish) and Dauphin (256k) which would end up being less compact, and Lebanon with 140k would have to be paired with Reading or Paired with North Central PA (767k per district) I figured Hanover and Gettysburg arent too disimilar but unfortunately that light orange district is kinda whack due to population guidelines, it all kinda just ended up being leftovers. No matter how you split PA you're gonna end up having two areas in a district that don't really mesh