FAIR DISTRICTING REAPPORTIONMENT PAGE

WIPE OUT GERRYMANDERS

Contents

The census and population standards: whom to count where
Standards for drawing districts
Practical hands-on tools
Challenges
Why have districts at all?

Alternatives to single-member districts

Plans, including maps

by level of government office

federal

United States Senate
United States House of Representatives

state
county
city
town

by location

United States of America
States (or not)

1. Delaware
2. Pennsylvania
3. New Jersey
4. Georgia
5. Connecticut
6. Massachusetts
7. Maryland
8. South Carolina
9. New Hampshire
10. Virginia
11. New Yorkshire
12. North Carolina
13. Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
14. Vermont
20. Mississippi
22. Alabama
23. Maine
37. Nebraska
39. North Dakota
40. South Dakota
41. Montana
44. Wyoming
49. Alaska

Why have districts at all?

See alternatives at the Center for Voting and Democracy.
- Does the single transferable vote (STV) method of preference voting always produce competitive elections?

Practical hands-on tools

Game
National Conference of State Legislatures
Do-it-yourself kits:
- BARD: Better Automated ReDistricting
- Dave's Redistricting App (used by Daily Kos to draw these non-partisan maps of Congressional districts)
- an input form like this.
- New Yorkshire: U Map NY
- Iowa
- California
  - Los Angeles
    - used by civic group
- Oregon (mentioned at Willamette University and "Making the Vote Count")
- Utah: Provo schools
- Hawaii (mentioned at Fairvote)

Challenges

current

Population standards: whom to count where

Standards for drawing districts

American:
British: rules of Boundary Commission for England
Values employed by Ward Cleaver, in approximate order of application:
- Contiguity
  - by land (minimal crossing of water)
  - by road
  - by mass transit, such as a railroad
  - never by point contiguity (despite Brian Hayes)
- Equal population (±2%)
- Preserving community integrity
  - dividing as few communities as possible
  - dividing each community into as few parts as possible
  - dividing larger rather than smaller communities
- Compactness
  - minimal ratio of length to width of districts
  - minimal aggregate perimeters
    - This idea must be balanced against others. Some who advocate adherence to this standard ignore the obvious advantage of using recognized boundaries, such as waterways, railroads, and municipal boundaries. People should be able to locate a boundary easily and determine which side they are on. Running district lines on minor streets through neighborhoods leads to confusion, fragmentation, and undependable representation.
    - On this map for the New Yorkshire State Assembly designed to minimize aggregate distance each resident would have to travel to a district's center, one of the districts appears to cross Cayuga Lake at least twice. There are no bridges at these locations, so unless one can fly "high above Cayuga's waters" or cross by boat, reaching the center of the district requires passing through another district. The people passed on the way can make the trip even faster, so why place them in another district? Meanwhile, the heavily non-white Hempstead Crescent on Long Island, with just about the population of a single district, is divided three or four ways into white majority districts.
- Uniting communities of interest
- Social characteristics
- Integrity of boundaries
  - District lines should follow boundaries that are easy to follow: visible waterways, railroads, major roads, and municipal boundaries. Running district lines on minor streets through neighborhoods leads to confusion, fragmentation, and undependable representation. Excessive turns and complexity also confuses the public.
- Numbering:
  - Districts are named as well as numbered.
  - District numbers are assigned after districts are drawn, not before.
  - If numbers are immediately sequential, they usually appear in districts with a boundary in common.
  - Units of government usually have a series of sequential numbers assigned to their districts (e.g., 3, 4, 5).
  - Small districts are given smaller numbers than large districts, to allow the characters the best fit on a map.
Objectives disregarded by Ward Cleaver:
- Continuity
  - Attempts to preserve districts of the past deny the right of the present to full representation.
- Incumbent protection
  - Keeping legislators in office whose base has lost significance delays passage of innovative legislation.
Choosing an electoral outcome
- Some districts are drawn to achieve a desired outcome. This strategy can be undone by trends, including demographic changes.
  - Drawing a district so as to include a community of interest helps that community choose its favorite candidate and unite politically to get results. Although placing just enough of such a community in a district to give it likely control may produce good candidates and winners, it saddles those winning candidates with a difficult balancing act between communities with different interests. The candidates are distanced from the base of support. Too often, they can be led astray by backers and lobbyists from outside the district.
  - As long as districts are not gerrymandered to create safe districts, there will be plenty of competition. There may be a desire to make the elections more competitive. What does that mean? Will the two major parties be deliberately equalized? What about minor parties and independent candidates? Shooting for numbers depends on the ability to predict how people will vote years into the future based on their past behavior. Yet people change over time. Communities change demographically. Today's marginal district may become tomorrow's safe district.

Plans, including maps

by location

United States of America

Proposed equal districts for election of senators based on 2000 population, providing access via the Alaska Highway, or by water to Seattle or San Francisco.
Proposed congressional districts based on 1980 population for most states

Delaware

At-large district based on population since 1820

Pennsylvania

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 & 1980 population

New Jersey

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 & 1980 populations

Georgia

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 population

Connecticut

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 & 1980 population

Massachusetts

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 & 1980 population

Maryland

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 population

South Carolina

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 population

New Hampshire

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 & 1990 & 1980 populations

Virginia

Statewide
- Reports
  - Redistricting 2011 by League of Women Voters
- Proposed congressional districts based on 2010 & 2000 & 1990 & 1980 & 1970 & 1960 & 1950 & 1940 populations within a range of ±2%
- Proposed state legislative districts based on 2010 & 2000 populations
Franklin County
- Proposed election districts (for election of supervisors) based on 2010 population
- Projected election districts of the future (for election of supervisors)
The current mayoral election system in Richmond city
Roanoke city
- 1990 3-ward City council proposal
  - 5-ward proposal considered at public hearing in July, 1997

New Yorkshire State

Statewide
- U Map NY: developed by Common Cause and Newsday to cover Congressional, state legislative, and county legislative districts, without dealing with city or town councils
- Proposed congressional districts:
  - 2000 (with changes for 2000) & 1990 & 1980 congressional districts within a range of ±2%.
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 in New York City: Gotham, the Big Apple (70 KB file)
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 in western Long Island (70 KB file)
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 & 1970 in central Long Island
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 in eastern Long Island
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 in the lower Hudson Valley
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 in Upstate New Yorkshire
- 2000 New Yorkshire State Senate districts:
  - 2000 in central Long Island
  - Legislators rewrite census, stretching populations of districts to move them around the state.
- 2000 New Yorkshire State Assembly districts:
  - 2000 in most of Long Island
  - Legislators draw rubber map, stretching populations of districts to move them around the state.
New York City
Nassau County, Long Island
- County Board of Legislators
  - 7 districts, based on 2000 population
  - 9 districts, based on 2000 population
  - 12 districts, based on 2000 population
  - 15 districts, based on 2000 & 1970 populations
  - 19 districts, based on 2010 & 2000 populations
- Town of Hempstead, Long Island
  - 2010 & 2000 & 1990 Town council
    - After two centuries of at-large elections, the town is under court order to create six council districts. See proposals based on 1990 populations
- Town of North Hempstead, Long Island
  - Town council based on 2010 & 2000 & 1990 & 1980 & 1970 & 1960 populations
- Town of Oyster Bay, Long Island
  - 2010 & 2000 Town council
Suffolk County, Long Island
- Districts for county board of legislators:
  - 11 districts, based on 2000 population
  - 17 districts, based on 2000 population
  - 18 districts, based on 2010 & 2000 & 1990 populations
  - 19 districts, based on 2000 population
- Town of Babylon, Long Island
  - 2000 Town council
- Town of Brookhaven, Long Island
  - 2000 Town council
- Town of Huntington, Long Island
  - 2000 Town council
- Town of Islip, Long Island
  - 2000 Town council
- Town of Smithtown, Long Island
  - 2000 Town council

North Carolina

North Carolina congressional districts
- Proposed North Carolina congressional districts based on 2000 population
- "Machine Politics" by Brian Hayes

Rhode Island and Providence Plantations

Proposed congressional districts based on 2000 & 1980 population

Vermont

At-large district based on population since 1930

Mississippi

Proposed Mississippi congressional districts based on 2010 population

Alabama

Proposed Alabama congressional districts based on 2010 population

Maine

Proposed Maine congressional districts based on 2000 & 1990 & 1980 population

Plans, including maps

by legislative body

United States Congress

Senate

House of Representatives

guide
within a range of ±2%
- 1980 for most states
  - actual
    - apportionment, according to Congress
    - Wikipedia's list of congressional districts
- 2000 & 1990 & 1980 Maine
- 2000 & 1990 & 1980 New Hampshire
- 1930-2010 Vermont
- 2000 & 1980 Massachusetts
- 2000 & 1980 Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
- 2000 & 1980 Connecticut
- 2000 & 1990 & 1980 New Yorkshire: The Empire State. (Calling a state and a city by the same name would be too confusing.)
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 New York City: Gotham, the Big Apple (70 KB file)
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 Western Long Island (70 KB file)
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 & 1970 Central Long Island
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 Eastern Long Island
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 Lower Hudson Valley
  - 2000 & 1990 & 1980 Upstate
- 2000 & 1980 New Jersey
- 2000 & 1980 Pennsylvania
- 1930-2010 Delaware
- 2000 Maryland
- 2010 & 2000 & 1990 & 1980 & 1970 & 1960 & 1950 Virginia
- North Carolina:
  - 2000 North Carolina
  - "Machine Politics" by Brian Hayes
- 2000 South Carolina
- 2000 Georgia
- 2010 Alabama
- 2010 Mississippi
- 1930-2010 North Dakota
- 1930-2010 South Dakota
- 1930-2010 Montana
- 1880-2010 Wyoming
- 1930-2010 Alaska

State Legislature

Virginia: 2010 & 2000
New Yorkshire
- State Senate:
  - Legislators rewrite census, stretching populations of districts to move them around the state.
  - 2000 districts for central Long Island
- State Assembly
  - Legislators draw rubber map, stretching populations of districts to move them around the state.
  - 2000 districts for most of Long Island

County Board

Franklin County, Virginia
- Proposed election districts (for election of supervisors) based on 2010 population
- Projected election districts of the future (for election of supervisors)
Nassau County, Long Island
- 7 districts, based on 2000 population
- 9 districts, based on 2000 population
- 12 districts, based on 2000 population
- 15 districts, based on 2000 & 1970 populations
- 19 districts, based on 2010 & 2000 populations
Suffolk County, Long Island, based on 2010 & 2000 & 1990 populations:
- 9 districts, based on 2000 population
- 11 distrcts, based on 2000 population
- 17 districts, based on 2000 population
- 18 districts, based on 2010 & 2000 populations
- 19 districts, based on 2000 population