Redistricting is "a Math problem."

[DaShuckster]

Yesterday, following church services, my church had a guest speaker talking about the controversy going on in my State over the setting up of the new Congressional districts (imagine that.)

While gerrymandering has been been a concern in many states, until yesterday, I hadn't really stopped to think about it the way our guest speaker did. She was a Ph.D. mathematician who spoke to our state legislature earlier in the week as they grappled with setting up the new district lines. She said she felt awkward being thrust into the middle of a political fight because "politics isn't her thing."

She said redistricting shouldn't, by rights, be a political issue at all. She said it is simply a mathematical problem that can be rationally determined no matter what your political affiliation is. As she went through the math of it using no-brainer parameters such as:

• Equal Numbers. You want each district to have close to the same number of people (not too much above or below the average.);
• Geographically Compact. You want each district to be geographically compact as possible (there's a mathematical equation for this.);
• Similar Make-up. You want each district to be similar in its rural/urban make-up (i.e. number of people per square mile);
• Keep Counties intact. It's not always going to be possible, but an effort should be made to avoid dividing a county; and
• Avoid Splitting up Communities. Avoid breaking up communities (i.e. splitting up an Indian reservation.)

Given these parameters, a mathematicians can -- and in some states actually DO -- set up "fair" district lines. They can also determine how out-of-alignment a district proposal is. I was shocked to learn this mathematician believes Nebraska redistricting proposal is significantly skewed towards rural districts. What a shocker for Conservative-with-a-Capitol-C Nebraska!

 

[Knight In TN]

Yesterday, following church services, my church had a guest speaker talking about the controversy going on in my State over the setting up of the new Congressional districts (imagine that.)

While gerrymandering has been been a concern in many states, until yesterday, I hadn't really stopped to think about it the way our guest speaker did. She was a Ph.D. mathematician who spoke to our state legislature earlier in the week as they grappled with setting up the new district lines. She said she felt awkward being thrust into the middle of a political fight because "politics isn't her thing."

She said redistricting shouldn't, by rights, be a political issue at all. She said it is simply a mathematical problem that can be rationally determined no matter what your political affiliation is. As she went through the math of it using no-brainer parameters such as:

• Equal Numbers. You want each district to have close to the same number of people (not too much above or below the average.);
• Geographically Compact. You want each district to be geographically compact as possible (there's a mathematical equation for this.);
• Similar Make-up. You want each district to be similar in its rural/urban make-up (i.e. number of people per square mile);
• Keep Counties intact. It's not always going to be possible, but an effort should be made to avoid dividing a county; and
• Avoid Splitting up Communities. Avoid breaking up communities (i.e. splitting up an Indian reservation.)

Given these parameters, a mathematicians can -- and in some states actually DO -- set up "fair" district lines. They can also determine how out-of-alignment a district proposal is. I was shocked to learn this mathematician believes Nebraska redistricting proposal is significantly skewed towards rural districts. What a shocker for Conservative-with-a-Capitol-C Nebraska!

You'll never have similar makeup for all 3 congressional districts in Nebraska. Nor should you. It’s not possible without seriously splitting up pieces of your few urban areas and combining them with your massive stretches of rural areas.

It sounds like you just heard a speech from someone who wants to gerrymander the Nebraska 2nd to flip it blue.

 

[Crazyhole]

You'll never have similar makeup for all 3 congressional districts in Nebraska. Nor should you. It’s not possible without seriously splitting up pieces of your few urban areas and combining them with your massive stretches of rural areas.

It sounds like you just heard a speech from someone who wants to gerrymander the Nebraska 2nd to flip it blue.

The 2nd is already a swing district. I honestly can't see anyway to make it blue that wouldn't include a weird corridor that extends into Lincoln.

The way Nebraskas population is spread out, the districts we have now make sense. Nothing should change.

 

[DaShuckster]

It sounds like you just heard a speech from someone who wants to gerrymander the Nebraska 2nd to flip it blue.

Metro Omaha has grown in relation to other areas of the state -- surprise, surprise -- so the Omaha district needs to expand. The problem is solved by District 2 (Metro Omaha) expanding to include its southwestern suburb Elkhorn. But wait! That makes too much sense!

Instead, the Republican-controlled legislature plans to expand the district by including neighboring Saunders Co. which is a geographically large, rural county (further west of Elkhorn), skipping over Omaha's next-door suburb of Elkhorn.

Elkhorn is the more 'geographically compact' solution (it's an Omaha suburb for crying out loud) plus the area's make-up (people per square mile) matches up much more with Omaha than the rural Saunders Co. does. So given the parameters that the State is using to determine districts, the mathematician found this solution...odd.

Looks to me like Knight In TN got it half right. Looks like the legislature is trying to gerrymander things in order to slow down the blue-leaning Nebraska 2nd.

No more of this red & blue-stripped Nebraska come POTUS election day!!! Go Big Red!!!

 

[Crazyhole]

Metro Omaha has grown in relation to other areas of the state -- surprise, surprise -- so the Omaha district needs to expand. The problem is solved by District 2 (Metro Omaha) expanding to include its southwestern suburb Elkhorn. But wait! That makes too much sense!

Instead, the Republican-controlled legislature plans to expand the district by including neighboring Saunders Co. which is a geographically large, rural county (further west of Elkhorn), skipping over Omaha's next-door suburb of Elkhorn.

Elkhorn is the more 'geographically compact' solution (it's an Omaha suburb for crying out loud) plus the area's make-up (people per square mile) matches up much more with Omaha than the rural Saunders Co. does. So given the parameters that the State is using to determine districts, the mathematician found this solution...odd.

Looks to me like Knight In TN got it half right. Looks like the legislature is trying to gerrymander things in order to slow down the blue-leaning Nebraska 2nd.

No more of this red & blue-stripped Nebraska come POTUS election day!!! Go Big Red!!!

You knothead. Elkhorn is already in district 2. Find better mathematicians next time

 

[Crazyhole]

Our District | U.S. Representative Don Bacon

bacon.house.gov

 

[DaShuckster]

My bad. The proposed Congressional district map removes Elkhorn from District 2 (Omaha) and replaces it with rural Saunders County.

The issues I outlined remain the same.

 

[Crazyhole]

My bad. The proposed Congressional district map removes Elkhorn from District 2 (Omaha) and replaces it with rural Saunders County.

The issues I outlined remain the same.

No it doesn't. All it does is add Saunders county. The one you are talking about got no traction. You're conflating two proposed maps.

 

[Knight In TN]

Metro Omaha has grown in relation to other areas of the state -- surprise, surprise -- so the Omaha district needs to expand. The problem is solved by District 2 (Metro Omaha) expanding to include its southwestern suburb Elkhorn. But wait! That makes too much sense!

Instead, the Republican-controlled legislature plans to expand the district by including neighboring Saunders Co. which is a geographically large, rural county (further west of Elkhorn), skipping over Omaha's next-door suburb of Elkhorn.

Elkhorn is the more 'geographically compact' solution (it's an Omaha suburb for crying out loud) plus the area's make-up (people per square mile) matches up much more with Omaha than the rural Saunders Co. does. So given the parameters that the State is using to determine districts, the mathematician found this solution...odd.

Looks to me like Knight In TN got it half right. Looks like the legislature is trying to gerrymander things in order to slow down the blue-leaning Nebraska 2nd.

No more of this red & blue-stripped Nebraska come POTUS election day!!! Go Big Red!!!

Can you show the proposed solution, and why it doesn’t make sense, along with the better solution your totally impartial mathematician proposed?

 

[DaShuckster]

Can you show the proposed solution, and why it doesn’t make sense, along with the better solution your totally impartial mathematician proposed?

You don't redistrict an expanding Metro Omaha by removing a suburb of 10,000 and replacing it with a rural county with a population of 21,000 who's largest 'city' has 4500 people.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Saunders County is solidly Republican while Elkhorn (a white collar suburb) tends to vote Democrat. This is a textbook example of gerrymandering.

 

[Knight In TN]

You don't redistrict an expanding Metro Omaha by removing a suburb of 10,000 and replacing it with a rural county with a population of 21,000 who's largest 'city' has 4500 people.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Saunders County is solidly Republican while Elkhorn (a white collar suburb) tends to vote Democrat. This is a textbook example of gerrymandering.

This has already been debunked by Crazyhole.

Also, it’s whose… not who’s.

And just for argument’s sake, didn’t you say in your OP that districts should have a similar makeup?

 

[DaShuckster]

This has already been debunked by Crazyhole.

LOL

And just for argument’s sake, didn’t you say in your OP that districts should have a similar makeup?

YES. The legislature is planning to remove a true suburb and replace it with a rural Nebraska farm county. That county is not similar to the rest of the Omaha district in any way, shape, or form and also isn't geographically congruent. As I said before, it's a textbook example of gerrymandering.

 

[goodknightfl]

It is nothing new, Both parties do it as best they can.

 

[Knight In TN]

LOL

YES. The legislature is planning to remove a true suburb and replace it with a rural Nebraska farm county. That county is not similar to the rest of the Omaha district in any way, shape, or form and also isn't geographically congruent. As I said before, it's a textbook example of gerrymandering.

Just an LOL from you? No response to where he said they don’t remove the suburb, just adds the county?

Is that not accurate?

 

[Crazyhole]

LOL

YES. The legislature is planning to remove a true suburb and replace it with a rural Nebraska farm county. That county is not similar to the rest of the Omaha district in any way, shape, or form and also isn't geographically congruent. As I said before, it's a textbook example of gerrymandering.

You are literally making stuff up now. The original proposal to split Douglas County is no longer on the table, and it was only a first draft. It split Douglas but consolidated all of Sarpy County, and that was a no-go. The current proposal makes more sense, but the democrats want to add 80,000 urban residents in district 2 when only 20,000 is justified. Saunders has 20,000 people.

Your church mathematician lied to you, and you believed it.

 

[Knight In TN]

You are literally making stuff up now. The original proposal to split Douglas County is no longer on the table, and it was only a first draft. It split Douglas but consolidated all of Sarpy County, and that was a no-go. The current proposal makes more sense, but the democrats want to add 80,000 urban residents in district 2 when only 20,000 is justified. Saunders has 20,000 people.

Your church mathematician lied to you, and you believed it.

But but but, she said she doesn’t even get into politics, it’s not her thing!

She’s just out speaking on political topics because she’s super good at mathing, and that’s why the politics people are paying her to go explain to gullible people why math says they need to gerrymander district 2 blue!

 

[DaShuckster]

I thought we might be able to have an honest-to-goodness discussion about gerrymandering with a real-life example.

I should have known better. It’s like trying to have an intelligent discussion here about COVID.

 

[Knight In TN]

I thought we might be able to have an honest-to-goodness discussion about gerrymandering with a real-life example.

I should have known better. It’s like trying to have an intelligent discussion here about COVID.

Some of us are trying to have a discussion about it, but you’re just reacting to something you heard and won’t respond to an opposing viewpoint that said what you heard is incorrect.

 

[DaShuckster]

Some of us are trying to have a discussion about it, but you’re just reacting to something you heard and won’t respond to an opposing viewpoint that said what you heard is incorrect.

This poster below is 'trying to have a discussion about it'? Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!

But but but, she said she doesn’t even get into politics, it’s not her thing!

She’s just out speaking on political topics because she’s super good at mathing, and that’s why the politics people are paying her to go explain to gullible people why math says they need to gerrymander district 2 blue!

 

[Knight In TN]

This poster below is 'trying to have a discussion about it'? Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!

That’s one comment of several I’ve made on the topic, and it’s not directed at you.

If you’d like to continue the discussion you started, please provide some documentation that the big bad republicans are currently trying to cut Elkhorn out of the district and replace it with Saunders county as you claim.

If you don’t have that, just admit you got duped by the Democrat party in your area sending in an “impartial expert” to rile you up with stories of how the Republicans are totally cheating.

 

[Crazyhole]

That’s one comment of several I’ve made on the topic, and it’s not directed at you.

If you’d like to continue the discussion you started, please provide some documentation that the big bad republicans are currently trying to cut Elkhorn out of the district and replace it with Saunders county as you claim.

If you don’t have that, just admit you got duped by the Democrat party in your area sending in an “impartial expert” to rile you up with stories of how the Republicans are totally cheating.

The first proposal did cut Douglas County in half, including North Omaha and put them in district 1. The offset to that was to add eastern Sarpy County which is more metropolitan, and the entirety of Saunders County. It honestly wasn't a terrible proposal, but since it took north Omaha (lower income areas) and put it in district 1 the dems threw a fit. Their counter proposal is just to cut Sarpy County in half so that basically the entire Omaha metro area makes up D2. The problem with that is the way they draw the lines cuts up the suburbs and looks a lot more like gerrymandering to me, plus the populations in that proposed district don't add up.

What we are going to end up with is the exact same lines we currently have, with the addition of the county directly to the west, or possibly Washington County which is directly to the north. There isn't really much to get worked up about with any of this.

 

[OLearyLastCall]

Redistricting is a political fight because we have one party that wants as few people as possible to vote. Because of that, we now have both Dem and GOP legislatures trying to draw out the other party. None of it should exist.

 

[Crazyhole]

Redistricting is a political fight because we have one party that wants as few people as possible to vote. Because of that, we now have both Dem and GOP legislatures trying to draw out the other party. None of it should exist.

Right on cue. "Both parties do it, but its the Republicans' fault".

 

[OLearyLastCall]

Right on cue. "Both parties do it, but its the Republicans' fault".

How many red states have independent drawing commissions? Dems pass independent commissions to be fair, but the other side wants every advantage because they don't have the numbers and are grasping for air to survive to legislate through minority.

 

[Knight In TN]

How many red states have independent drawing commissions? Dems pass independent commissions to be fair, but the other side wants every advantage because they don't have the numbers and are grasping for air to survive to legislate through minority.

Dude, go look at Maryland’s districts, drawn by Dems. Then come back and tell me with a straight face that Dems don’t gerrymander.

 

[Crazyhole]

How many red states have independent drawing commissions? Dems pass independent commissions to be fair, but the other side wants every advantage because they don't have the numbers and are grasping for air to survive to legislate through minority.

They don't have the numbers, and yet they are the ones in control. Derp.

This thread and the OP are a perfect example of how stupid this topic is 99% of the time. Nebraskas 2nd district will literally fall along 2 county lines and split the 3rd county based on population requirements. All 3 counties are connected geographically. The one of the 3 that is split has too high of a population to make the numbers work without jigsawing through neighborhoods, which is exactly what gerrymandering looks like.

 

[Crazyhole]

 

[Crazyhole]

View embedded media

Where is shuckster to tell us this is a math solution?

 

[Knight In TN]

View embedded media

This is just the most impartial way to do it, as determined by a completely politically disinterested mathematician who goes around and gives lectures about how republicans are gerrymandering everything.

 

[DaShuckster]

This is just the most impartial way to do it, as determined by a completely politically disinterested mathematician who goes around and gives lectures about how republicans are gerrymandering everything.

The point of the presentation mentioned in the OP is that there is a mathematical way to avoid gerrymandering (democrat-states like Illinois or republican ones like Nebraska.)

 

[Crazyhole]

The point of the presentation mentioned in the OP is that there is a mathematical way to avoid gerrymandering (democrat-states like Illinois or republican ones like Nebraska.)

Sometimes that mathematical way makes for weird looking districts.