Michigan Redistricting: Analysis of Democrats State Senate Plan

The Michigan Democrat Party has released its proposed redistricting plan for the Michigan state senate. I previously released two possible maps and discussed the standards that such maps must follow.

Michigan Redistricting: Two Possible State Senate Maps

Here is the map.


Let’s consider their press release.

Michigan Democrats Introduce State Senate Redistricting Map
Map is Fair, Representative, and Avoids Partisan Gerrymandering

LANSING - Michigan Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer announced today that he has filed a redistricting plan with the State Senate Committee on Redistricting that would ensure voters are fairly represented in Lansing by creating sensible and competitive districts. The Committee had invited the public to submit maps for consideration and Brewer stated that this map deserved their attention.

“Redistricting should be politically fair and avoid partisan gerrymandering when drawing district boundaries,” said Brewer. “The map we’ve submitted is politically fair with 15 Republican, 15 Democratic, and eight swing districts, doesn’t create a single district boundary that would split a city or township in two, and only splits six counties. In short, it’s a map that simply makes sense.”

They don’t say which districts they consider which. I will rate them myself below. It is technically true that “doesn’t create a single district boundary that would split a city … in two”, but the release doesn’t mention that it splits Detroit in five pieces. It is false to say that “doesn’t create a single district boundary that would split a … township in two” since Browntown township in Wayne County is split between districts 1 and 3.

It is also false that the map “only splits six counties”, since it clearly splits seven (Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent, Genesee, Washtenaw, Ingham), including a double split of Genesee. In comparison, my maps both split only six counties. One has a double break in Genesee, the other does not.

Brewer added that the map also follows the requirements of the Federal Voting Rights Act by creating six “majority-minority” districts, five of which would be based in Detroit and one in Oakland County due to the growth of the African-American community through southeast Michigan.

Brewer is wrong about what the Voting Rights Act requires. This article is the best guide to the VRA that I could find.

(Before you flip out, yes I realize that the article comes from Daily Kos. It appears that the author is playing it straight. Of course, second opinions from the legal-minded commenters here are welcome.)

The VRA may require black-majority districts, but it almost certainly does not require “majority-minority” districts, where all the racial minorities are grouped together to form a majority. The second and third standards from Thornburg v. Gingles are definitely not satisfied. While there is nothing prohibiting a majority-minority district in Oakland, it is definitely not required. It is not even clear that Michigan is required to maintain five black-majority districts, given the massive population loss in Detroit. This would be a much closer call, however.

“This is Governor Snyder’s chance to show that he’s willing to put the interests of Michigan’s voters ahead of the interests of his own political party,” added Brewer. “If he is willing to dismiss this fair redistricting plan and instead sign one that is simply a partisan Republican gerrymander, he will send a very clear message to the people of Michigan; that he is just another Lansing politician beholden to special interests.”

(Eyeroll)

There is nothing terribly outrageous about this map, but it is a modest gerrymander and is probably about the best democrats could do without massively violating the rules. Their strategy is not hard to understand. Since they have no control over the process, they will present a slightly slanted plan, claim it is “fair”, and hope to guilt-trip Republicans (Snyder?) into compromising. It isn’t terribly likely to succeed, though it has some nonzero chance (a similar gambit seems to have worked for Republicans in Arkansas).

What is gerrymandered?

• Mt. Morris is included in the Saginaw-based district. Mt. Morris is the second most democrat area of Genesee, after Flint. This is not necessary and serves only to create a safe democrat district.
• Ypsilanti area is included in a district with SW Oakland.
• The minority-majority district in Oakland.
• Cutting Detroit into strips. This is probably necessary due to the VRA, but it is nonetheless gerrymandering.

Let’s rate the districts.

1. Safe D [Detroit shoreline] Coleman Young
2. Safe D [northern Detroit, Grosse Pointes] Bert Johnson
3. Safe D [central Detroit, Lincoln Park, Southgate] Virgil Smith
4. Safe D [central Detroit, Dearborn] Morris Hood
5. Safe D [western Detroit, Redford, Dearborn Heights] Tupak Hunter (TL)
6. Safe D [SW Wayne] Hoon-Yung Hopgood, Patrick Colbeck
7. Tossup [Westland, Livonia, Plymouth, Northville] Glenn Andersen (TL)
8. Safe D [southern Macomb County] Steven Bieda
9. Lean R [Clinton, Macomb, Chesterfield, Harrison] Jack Brandenburg
10. Safe R [N Macomb County, Sterling Heights] Tory Rocca
11. Safe R [St. Clair, Lapeer] Phil Pavlov
12. Safe R [N Oakland County] Jim Marleau
13. Safe D [Troy, Royal Oak, Ferndale] John Pappageorge (TL)
14. Safe D [Southfield, Pontiac, Bloomfield, Oak Park] Vincent Gregory
15. Lean D [Farmington, West Bloomfield, Waterford, Spring Lake] Mike Kowall
16. Tossup [SW Oakland, Ypsilanti] Open
17. Tossup [Monroe, Lenawee] Randy Richardville (TL)
18. Safe D [Washtenaw County] Rebekah Warren
19. Lean R [Calhoun, Eaton, S Ingham] Mike Nofs, Rick Jones
20. Tossup [Kalamazoo County] Open
21. Safe R [Hillsdale, Branch, Jackson] Bruce Caswell
22. Safe R [Berrien, Cass, St. Jospeh] John Proos
23. Safe D [Ingham County] Gretchen Whitmer (TL)
24. Safe R [Livingston, Shiawassee] Joe Hune
25. Safe R [Allegan, VanBuren, S Kent] Tonya Schuitmaker
26. Safe D [Flint, western Genesee County] John Gleason (TL)
27. Safe R [Clinton, Ionia, Montcalm, Barry] Judy Emmons
28. Safe R [Kent County outside Grand Rapids] Mark Jansen (TL), Dave Hildenbrand
29. Tossup [Grand Rapids, Walker] Open
30. Safe R [Ottawa County] Arlan Meekhof
31. Tossup [the Thumb, E Genesee] Mike Green, David Robertson
32. Safe D [Saginaw, Mt. Morris] Roger Khan (TL)
33. Safe R [Midland, Isabella, Gratiot, Mecosta, Oscela] John Moolenaar, Darwin Booher
34. Tossup [Muskegon, Oceana, Mason, Manistee] Geoff Hansen
35. Safe R [Grand Traverse area] Howard Walker
36. Lean D [NE Lower Peninsula, Bay] Open
37. Safe R [N Lower Peninsula, E Upper Peninsula] Open
38. Tossup [Upper Peninsula excluding Mackinac, Chippewa] Tom Casperson

Here is a summary of the ratings.

Rating: SR/LR/TU/LD/SD
Old……. 13 / 6 / 7 / 1 / 11
New…… 13 / 2 / 8 / 2 / 13

Some parts of the map are actually the same as what I drew. These areas are pretty much forced by the need to avoid breaks. Interestingly, five of the eight tossup districts would have no incumbent and another would pit two Republicans against each other. Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

In any case, this map is not likely to be adopted.

Previous articles on Michigan redistricting:
Michigan Congressional Redistricting: Two Possible Maps
Michigan Redistricting: Two Possible State Senate Maps
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part I: Wayne County
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part II: Oakland and Genesee
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part III: Macomb and the Thumb
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part IV: The Rest of the State

State Employee Who Was Fired for Target Shooting Reinstated

Christine Boone, former director of the Blind Training Center who was abruptly fired for training students to shoot pellet guns, has been reinstated.

Arbitrator rules in favor of Christine Boone, former director of Michigan Commission for the Blind Training Center, ordering she be reinstated with back pay and benefits

Previous: Fired for Training with Pellet Guns

How Busing Wrecked Kalamazoo

Julie Mack gives some fascinating history of school busing in Kalamazoo.

School Zone blog: 57th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education coincides with 40th anniversary of Kalamazoo school busing case

It is important to remember that forced segregation and forced integration are both violations of freedom of association. Voluntary association was not given a chance.

By the time integration came to a head here in 1971, schools segregated because of housing patterns had become a civil rights issue. Moreover, Kalamazoo was a changed city: As blacks from the rural South moved to the urban North in massive numbers, Kalamazoo's black population increased from 2,468 in 1950 to 8,534 by 1970. The city's Northside neighborhood underwent a dramatic transformation from a white, Dutch neighborhood to one that was overwhelmingly African-American.

In January 1971, the Kalamazoo school board decided to racially balance the high schools that fall and the junior high schools in fall 1972. The plan for the elementary schools, the most controversial and complicated, was put on hold.

But that April, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled busing was an appropriate method to achieve integration. The pressure now increased for the district to desegregate all its schools immediately. School board meetings attracted overflow crowds and tempers flared. Letters to the editor filled full pages of the Kalamazoo Gazette.

On Friday, May 7, 1971 -- 40 years ago this month -- the school board reversed its January decision and voted 4-3 to racially balance all its schools in the fall.

The vote followed days of drama. The board was to vote on Monday, May 3, but so many people attended the meeting at Loy Norrix High School auditorium that the event was adjourned by the fire marshal.

The board reconvened three days later at Miller Auditorium. More than 2,000 people were in the audience and 130 people spoke. However, a court injunction delayed the actual vote until the next day.

The plan was supported by board members Gerard Thomas, Andrew Luff, Edward Thompson and J. Peter Schma; dissenting were Norman Bruez, A.T. Lacy and Allan Tyler.

Voters expressed their opposition in the June school election. The districts operating millage request was defeated by a 2-1 ratio; two anti-busing candidates Dale Pattison and Jack Hoekstra were elected to the school board, each garnering nearly twice as many votes as their pro-busing counterparts.

The new school board majority rescinded the desegregation plan and Superintendent John Cochran was forced to resign.

By late summer, the school board approved a voluntary desegregation plan. Within a week, Richard Enslen -- who later became a federal judge -- filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Kalamazoo NAACP, naming as plaintiffs 11 black schoolchildren. The lead plaintiff was the stepdaughter of Robert Jones, then an Upjohn chemist who went onto become state representative before he died last fall.

The lawsuit sought a court injunction to impose busing that fall. U.S. District Judge Noel Fox issued the injunction, which was upheld by the appellate court. Three days before the start of school, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Byron White refused to hear the Kalamazoo school board's request to overturn Fox's decision.

When schools opened Sept. 7, 1971, about 10,000 of the districts 16,000 students rode school buses, about 4,000 more than the previous school year.

Kalamazoo was one of only two communities in Michigan to have court-ordered bussing -- Pontiac was the other. And for years, even decades, busing was part of the district's identity.

Busing was the single biggest factor in the decline of Kalamazoo. Current Kalamazoo GOP Chairman Al Heilman, who was a county commissioner in the 1970s, recalls that Republicans controlled the commission 15-2. Heilman represented the Westnedge Hill/Crosstown area, which at the time was a solidly Republican district.

Rather than put up with needlessly long bus rides and liberal social engineering, people began moving to Portage and other outlying areas. Kalamazoo lost a good chunk of its middle class and gradually transformed into a leftist stronghold. Kalamazoo's current depressed condition is largely a result of that decision.

Forty years later, school busing has a mixed record. No question, academic outcomes have improved dramatically for African-Americans, both locally and nationally. In 1970, only 31 percent of U.S. blacks age 25 or older had a high school diploma compared to 54 percent of whites. Today, 84 percent of black adults are high school graduates compared to 87 percent of whites.

More diplomas does not mean better education. Former WMU President Diether Haenicke has stated that many graduates of Kalamazoo Central are functionally illiterate.

On the other hand, there's no question that busing fueled white- and middle-class flight out of Kalamazoo Public Schools. Moreover, the fact that many African-American families continue to live in social isolation in low-income neighborhoods, not to mention the concentration of low-income minority students in a handful of Kalamazoo County schools, speaks to the failures of court-ordered busing as a solution to the problems of poverty and racism in America.

There were plenty of hopes and fears in Kalamazoo 40 years ago. In retrospect, it seems many of the fears were unfounded, but many of the hopes have been unfulfilled.

Sadly, the malefactors behind this decision were rewarded. Richard_Enslen was appointed a federal judge by Jimmy Carter. Robert Jones became mayor of Kalamazoo and and a state representative.

Regular people continue to be hurt by what Thomas Sowell calls the Vision of the Annointed.

Fired for Self-defense

Shame on Walgreens.

Walgreens fires armed worker

POLITICAL UPDATE--Education

This update focuses on education.

Gary North: College: Why It Is Not a Bubble
Thomas Sowell: Bull About Bullying
Phyllis Schlafly: What Students Learn and Don't Learn
Phyllis Schlafly: Education Spending Won't Create Jobs
Phyllis Schlafly: Education Spending Has a Simple Solution
Steve Sailer: The NCLB Fiasco After Ten Years: What Were Bush And Kennedy Thinking?
Terry Jeffrey: Do Wisconsin's Public Schools Deserve to Survive?
Bill Walker: The Education Scam

Learn more about education issues in Education Reporter.

POLITICAL UPDATE--News from Abroad

This update focuses on news from abroad.

Steve Sailer: Obama and Osama: Can We Go Home Now?
Jeffrey Tucker: An Algorean Utopia in Haiti
Kevin Grace: Canada’s Stephen Harper: My Part In His 2011 Election Triumph
Pat Buchanan: When Dictators Fall, Who Rises?
Lew Rockwell: The EU Crack-Up
Pat Buchanan: Are We Allied to a Corpse?
Pat Buchanan: Is Tribalism the Future?
Pat Buchanan: Koran Burning And Muslim Persecution Of Christians—Who Are These People We Are Fighting For?
Pat Buchanan: A Community Organizer Goes to War
Dan Flynn: Muammar Gaddafi, Socialist

POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.

Michigan Redistricting: State House Part IV: The Rest of the State

The three parts of my analysis of redistricting the Michigan state house focused on southeastern Michigan. This final part finishes the rest of the state.
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part I: Wayne County
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part II: Oakland and Genesee
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part III: Macomb and the Thumb

See the current map here: MICHIGAN'S 110 HOUSE DISTRICTS

Let’s look at the map first and then see where it came from.



The new map must of course account for population shifts in the state. We have already seen that Wayne lost 240000 people, and hence will lose 3 state representatives. Other losses include 10000 each from Genesee and Saginaw. There were smaller losses in the Upper Peninsula, the Thumb, and the Sunrise Coast.

The biggest gain was in Macomb with 53000. Other major gains include Kent with 28000, Ottawa with 25000, Washtenaw with 22000, Livingston with 14000, Kalamazoo with 12000, and Clinton with 11000. Smaller gains were scattered around western and southern Michigan.

It is tricky to say which districts are ‘new’, since each new district is made up of parts of old districts. But we can say definitely which regions gained districts. One went to Kent/Ottawa/Muskegon/Allegan/Kalamazoo, one went to Washtenaw/Monroe/Lenawee/Jackson/Eaton, and one went to a region containing Macomb and the north-central Lower Peninsula. The districts that I designated as ‘new’ (21-23) are in S Kent/NE Allegan, Ann Arbor suburbs, and Port Huron/N Macomb.

The first article above contains the basics on the rules that any map must follow. As before, we want to minimize county and city/township breaks. Hence when a county can contain some number of districts without being broken, it is usually a good idea to implement this. In this map, such counties are:

1 district: Lapeer, Grand Traverse
2 districts: Livingston, Muskegon
3 districts: Ingham, Ottawa
4 districts: Washtenaw
20 districts: Wayne

These areas can be dealt with separately.

SPECIFIC COUNTIES

Drawing districts in Ingham is tricky because there appear to be several discontiguous precincts. The only district in this county that is winnable for Republicans is the out-county district (67), although it has been held by Byrums all decade. It is possible to marginally improve this district while maintaining one city break (Lansing) by taking a different chunk of Lansing. If two breaks are allowed, it can be made nearly safe by excising Lansing and replacing it with a chuck of Meridian.


The question for Republicans in Washtenaw is whether to go for one safe seat or two marginal seats. This time, I went for the safe route. I created a new democrat seat (22) in the Ann Arbor suburbs. This takes the pressure off 52 and 55, which have been democrat as often as not. There is one break in Ann Arbor.


In Kent County it would be possible to have exactly seven districts by underpopulating them, but the smallest number of breaks that I could find in this scenario is four. However, if Kent and Allegan combine for eight districts, it is possible to avoid any city/township breaks.


This depends on breaking Grand Rapids into exactly two districts, which are which are very near the upper threshold. I tried to create a Grand Rapids district friendly to Republicans. The new 75 is better than its current incarnation, but I wouldn’t rate it any better than a tossup. This is pushing it a bit with respect to clean city breaks. District 76 is near minority-majority.


In the Kalamazoo/Calhoun area, several improvements are possible. Due to population growth, Kalamazoo and Calhoun cannot combine solely. Adding VanBuren with these counties allows them to share five districts. Kalamazoo city and most of K Township combine for one safe dem district (60). (This does not count as a break due to Apol standard C8B.) This makes district 61 safe.

District 62 is a swing district dominated by Battle Creek. Improving it requires stripping out Albion, its only other dem area. Albion has to go to district 63 (Jase Bolger’s district), making it a bit weaker, but still safe. Would the Speaker accept this for the good of the party?

District 80 loses a chunk of Allegan and adds the southern tier of Kalamazoo.


Now let’s zoom out and look at the statewide map. Many shifts are necessary to account for population changes. Some can also help Republicans. Dividing Cass differently (adding Dowagiac to 59) makes 78 safer. Shifting Ionia city to 87 helps 70 a bit.

The northeastern Lower Peninsula is carved up in a way that should be an improvement. District 105 adds the dem area of Presque Isle, but is still safe. District 106 takes in more of the Lake Huron coastline, but is no worse than before. The new 97, anchored by Missaukee and N Midland, is improved. The new 103, with Kalkaska and Otsego, is also improved.

BREAKS, POPULATION, AND VOTING RIGHTS

Overall, this map breaks 22 counties, including three double breaks (St. Clair, Jackson, Kalamazoo). The current map breaks 23 counties with two double breaks (St. Clair, Ottawa).

This map also breaks 13 cities/townships, including breaking Detroit four ways and two double breaks (Sterling Heights, Clinton Twp). These breaks are in Wayne (5/8), Macomb (3/5), Oakland (2), Flint, Ann Arbor, and Lansing. The current map breaks 17 cities/townships, including a triple break for Detroit. These breaks are in Wayne (6/8), Macomb (4), Oakland (2), Genesee (2), Ann Arbor, Lansing, and Grand Rapids.

The smallest district population is 85324 (district 92), which is just outside what is allowed and needs to be adjusted, perhaps by adding another break. Otherwise the smallest is 85396 (89). The largest district population is 94304 (93).

There are 10 black-majority districts, down two from the current map due to population loss in Detroit. The number of black-majority districts could be increased by adding more breaks around Detroit, as seen in Part I.

DISTRICT DESCRIPTIONS

22. Safe D [Scio, Pittsfield, NE Ann Arbor] (new)
23. Safe R(++++) [S Kent, NE Allegan] (new)
47. Safe R [N Livingston]
52. Safe R(+++) [W Washtenaw]
53. Safe D [Ann Arbor]
54. Safe D [Ypsilanti]
55. Lean R(+) [S Monroe, E Lenawee]
56. Tossup [N Monroe]
57. Tossup [W Lenawee]
58. Safe R [Branch, Hillsdale]
59. Safe R [St. Joseph, N Cass]
60. Safe D [Kalamazoo]
61. Safe R(+) [Portage, Oshtemo, Texas]
62. Lean R(+) [S Calhoun]
63. Safe R [E Kalamazoo, N Calhoun]
64. Tossup [S Jackson]
65. Lean R [N Jackson, E Eaton]
66. Safe R [SE Livingston]
67. Lean R(+) [S Ingham]
68. Safe D [Lansing]
69. Safe D [East Lansing, Meridian]
70. Lean R [Montcalm, E Ionia]
71. Lean R [Eaton]
72. Safe R [Kentwood, Lowell]
73. Safe R [Walker, Plainfield, Alpine]
74. Safe R [Jenison, SE Ottowa]
75. Tossup [peripheral Grand Rapids]
76. Safe D [central Grand Rapids]
77. Safe R [Wyoming, Grandville]
78. Safe R(+) [S Berrien, SW Cass]
79. Safe R [N Berrien]
80. Safe R [VanBuren, S Kalamazoo]
82. Safe R [Lapeer]
84. Safe R(+) [Tuscola, E Saginaw, E Bay]
85. Safe R(+) [Shiawassee, St. Johns]
86. Safe R [Grand Rapids Twp, N Kent]
87. Safe R [Barry, W Ionia]
88. Safe R [Allegan]
89. Safe R [N Ottowa]
90. Safe R [Holland]
91. Lean R [S, W Muskegon]
92. Safe D [Muskegon city]
93. Safe R [Gratiot, S Clinton]
94. Safe R [W Saginaw]
95. Safe D [Saginaw city]
96. Safe D [Bay]
97. Safe R(+) [Missaukee, Roscommon, Gladwin, N Midland]
98. Safe R [S Midland, E Isabella]
99. Lean R [Mecosta, Mount Pleasant]
100. Safe R [Newaygo, Oceana, Lake]
101. Lean R [Leelanau, Benzie, Manistee, Mason]
102. Safe R [Wexford, Osceola, Clare]
103. Lean R(+) [Kalkaska, Otsego, Crawford, Oscoda, Ogemaw]
104. Safe R [Grand Traverse]
105. Safe R [Antrim, Charlevoix, Cheboygan, Presque Isle]
106. Lean D [Alpena, Alcona, Montmorency, Iosco, Arenac]
107. Lean R [Emmet, Mackinac, Chippewa]
108. Lean R [Delta, Menominee, Dickinson]
109. Safe D [Marquette, Alger, Schoolcraft, Luce]
110. Lean D [W Upper Peninsula]

DISTRICT RATINGS

Rating: SR/LR/TU/LD/SD
Old……. 24 / 13 / 8 / 3 / 10
New…… 31 / 12 / 4 / 2 / 11

Combined with the ratings for southeast Michigan, we have the following.

Rating: SR/LR/TU/LD/SD
Old……. 35 / 18 / 12 / 4 / 41
New…… 45 / 19 / _5 / 2 / 39

Thus this map is a definite improvement over the existing map. This is due mainly to population shifts, but also to careful line-drawing. Still, the map is not completely safe for Republicans. It would still have produced a democrat majority in a wave election like 2008.

There are two reasons for this. First, state house elections are held in presidential election years, which are friendlier to democrats, as well as off years. State senate elections are only held in off years. Second, districts the size of house districts appear less easy to manipulate than districts the size of senate or congressional districts. It does not appear to be possible to make a totally safe house map absent massive gerrymandering.

This map should give Republicans a majority in good or average years, which makes it good in my book.

Previous articles on Michigan redistricting:
Michigan Congressional Redistricting: Two Possible Maps
Michigan Redistricting: Two Possible State Senate Maps
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part I: Wayne County
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part II: Oakland and Genesee
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part III: Macomb and the Thumb

Michigan Redistricting: State House Part III: Macomb and the Thumb

The first and second parts of my analysis of redistricting the Michigan state house focused on Wayne County and Oakland/Genesee Counties. The first article contains the basics on the rules that any map must follow.

Michigan Redistricting: State House Part I: Wayne County
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part II: Oakland and Genesee

In part III, we consider Macomb County. We have seen that districts in Wayne County can be drawn to avoid a break, and Lapeer County can constitute its own district. Since I grouped Oakland and Genesee together, either Macomb must be unbroken, or it must share districts with counties in the Thumb, particularly St. Clair.

Currently Macomb has about 8.8 districts. It saw the largest numerical increase of any county in the state, gaining 52829 residents (ideally about .6 districts). Its ideal number of districts is now 9.36.

These new residents were not evenly distributed. Population gains were biggest in the ‘middle tier’ townships. Macomb Township gained an incredible 29000 people, Shelby gained 8600, and Chesterfield 6000. Also, Sterling Heights gained 5000 and Washington gained 6000. North Macomb had stable population. South Macomb saw small losses, with Warren losing 4000, St. Clair Shores 3000, Eastpointe 2000. These losses occurred at the same time that south Macomb saw an influx of former Detroit residents moving to the suburbs.

One possibility for Macomb is to overpopulate its districts so that it has exactly nine. This would average a population of 93442. There are two problems with this. One is that overpopulated districts need to be balanced with underpopulated districts elsewhere in the state. This makes drawing the whole map difficult. The second problem is that not breaking Macomb leads to breaks in Sanilac and Tuscola.

Another possibility is to share 11 districts between Macomb and St. Clair. This gives an average of 91274, which is still pretty far over. It also leads to a break in Tuscola.

Instead, I opted to combine Macomb, St. Clair, Sanilac, and Huron into 12 districts for an average population of 90021. This avoids any county breaks in the Thumb.

City and township breaks must also be considered. There must be breaks in Warren, Sterling Heights, and Clinton due to population. There also must be a break either in or around Shelby. I have not found a map with fewer than five breaks (counting double breaks).

Currently Macomb has 5 Republicans and 4 democrats. St. Clair and Sanilac have two more Republicans. Three of the Republican districts (St. Clair Shores/Harrison, Chesterfield, Sanilac/Port Huron) were held by democrats before 2010. A reasonable goal for a new map is to strengthen (or at least not weaken) all the vulnerable Republican districts and add a new Republican district in the growing areas.

The ‘new’ district is squeezed in to contain Port Huron, the second-to-the-top tier of townships, and the top tier of Macomb County. No district with Port Huron is completely safe, but this district is likely to elect a Republican. The Chesterfield district is shoved over to Washington, which should make it safe.

Here is the map. There are breaks in Warren, Sterling Heights (double) and Clinton (double).



Ratings and descriptions for the map:
21. Lean R(+++) [Port Huron, N Macomb] (This is the new district.)
24. Lean R [St. Clair Shores, Harrison, SE Clinton]
25. Safe D [N Warren, S Sterling Heights]
29. Safe D [S Warren, Center Line]
30. Safe R [Sterling Heights]
31. Safe D [Clinton, Mount Clemens]
32. Safe R(+) [Chesterfield, Leroy, Ray, Washington]
33. Safe R [Macomb, NW Clinton]
36. Safe R [Shelby, Utica, N Sterling Heights]
42. Safe D [Eastpointe, Roseville, Fraser]
81. Safe R [S St. Clair]
83. Lean R [Huron, Sanilac, N St. Clair]

Hence we have the following ratings:

Rating: SR/LR/TU/LD/SD
Old……. 4 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 4
New…… 5 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 4

Previous articles on Michigan redistricting:
Michigan Congressional Redistricting: Two Possible Maps
Michigan Redistricting: Two Possible State Senate Maps
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part I: Wayne County
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part II: Oakland and Genesee

Election Results

Fresh from Election Magic...

[9:20 PM] The KRESA tax is passing more than 2:1.

Totten and Hill will win in the KPS school board race.

Burr and Eldridge will win in Gull Lake. Lorence Wenke has a poor thrid-place showing.

Mattawan millage renewal will pass. Building proposal is close...

Not much from Portage yet...

[10:06 PM] KRESA tax passes with about 73%.

Mattawan building tax failing with 41% and one precinct remaining.

Totten wins an easy first, Hill a comfortable second.

Burr and Eldridge win easily in Gull Lake.

Eddy and Hartridge will win in Portage with close to twice as many votes as Kurdys and Hollenbeck. Portage will get dragged through the mud for another year...

Ongley, Brown, Behr, and Yantis win Portage Library Board.

[10:15 PM] Mattawan is final. Building tax FAILS 44% to 56%. Millage renewal passes 66% to 34%.

Building tax passed in Oshtemo and Texas (in person), failed in Oshtemo and Texas absentees, Prairie Ronde, Almena, and Antwerp.

Remember the government tax motto: Yes means yes, no means try again!

[10:21 PM] Over in Calhoun, Republican Julie Camp wins a seat on the Kellogg Community College Board. She is already a Calhoun County Commissioner.

Calhoun County Commission Redistricting Plan Adopted

Calhoun County has completed its county commission redistricting. The apportionment commission voted 3-2 to support a plan by Clerk Anne Norlander. The vote was along party lines.

GOP-backed county board redistricting plan wins approval‎

Calhoun County had very minor population changes. It lost about 1800 people overall, with the biggest changes being losses of 1000 in Battle Creek and 500 in Albion. While many counties are cutting the number of county commissioners, Calhoun has only seven and no compelling need to change that number.

Unlike neighboring Kalamazoo County, much of Calhoun is swing territory. A majority (4/7) seats flipped to Republican in 2010. Most of these had been picked up by democrats over the past decade.

Here is the breakdown (R-D) over the past decade.
1998: 5-2
2000: 4-3
2002: 3-4
2004: 3-4
2006: 2-5
2008: 1-6
2010: 5-2

The swingy nature of Calhoun makes it difficult to gerrymander, even if you want to. With seven districts, the numbers work to have Battle Creek and Springfield make up three districts. Then Bedford, Pennfield, and Convis naturally make up a district. The rest of the county almost has to have districts based in Emmett, Marshall, and Albion.

The Norlander map can almost be considered a 'least change' map. The descriptions of the districts (both before and after) follow. They can be compared to the current districts here. The partisan percentages come from the 2008 sheriff race (51% R countywide).


1. [48% R] Tossup [W Battle Creek, Springfield]
2. [28% R] Safe D [N Battle Creek]
3. [45% R] Safe D [E Battle Creek]
4. [52% R] Tossup [Bedford, Pennfield, Convis]
5. [58% R] Safe R [Emmett, Newton, Leroy, Athens]
6. [65% R] Safe R [Marshall area]
7. [48% R] Lean D [Albion area]

Districts 4 and 5 are unchanged. Clarendon is moved from 6 to 7. This makes 7 a bit more friendly for its Republican incumbent, but it will be difficult to hold in any case. In Battle Creek, 1 loses one precinct to 3. Districts 2 and 3 trade a few precincts. District 2 remains the most heavily minority district at 30% black. The democrat plan seems to have attempted to make district 1 more democrat.

Overall, it seems like a decent map.

Previous:
Kalamazoo County Commission Redistricting Plan Adopted

Pakistan's Perfidy

By far the best article commenting on Osama's demise is this one by Steve Sailer.

Obama and Osama: Can We Go Home Now?

Conservatives Win in Canada

The Conservative Party of Canada won an outright majority in yesterday's election after leading a minority government for the past five years.

Liberal Party of Canada Buried at Sea After Dying in Firefight

Kurdys and Hollenbeck for Portage School Board

The race for Portage School Board has revolved around the firing of Superintendent Marcia Wells.

Melanie Kurdys has been the leading critic of Wells on the board. She is also a strong conservative Republican and advocate of government accountability. Kurdys was initially alone in criticizing Wells, and the other members of the board were critical of her persistence. But as the composition of the board changed, Kurdys won over those who had initially been hostile or skeptical, including Hollenbeck.

So why did Wells deserve to be fired? It has become clear that she is an autocrat who opposed any transparency or accountability for her actions. In particular, the board directed her to provide information on administrator contracts, and she outright refused to comply with that policy. She should have been fired right there. No further argument about Wells' conduct is necessary.

There was more, though. Wells made false allegations against the then-president of the board, Dale Posthumus, that led him to resign in disgust. She chose to hold a performance review in public, hoping to intimidate the board into not airing criticism in public. (This backfired.)

Given Wells manifest 'rule or ruin' tactics, the board made the decision to buy out her contract rather than fire her outright. While a firing for cause would have been justified and viscerally satisfying, the board likely made the right choice. Critics of the board are objecting to the expense, but fighting a lawsuit would also be expensive, and would drag out the controversy. (The situation is reminiscent of the firing of Judy Bailey.)

Wells has attracted a small band of supporters. Two of them, Eddy and Hartridge, are also running for the board. They are running on the bizarre platform that the board should not hold the administration accountable for its actions. While they criticize the buyout expense, they don't want to hold the administration accountable for its expenses.

Kurdys and Hollenbeck should be reelected.

Vote NO on the KRESA Tax Hike

On Tuesday voters will decide the fate of the KRESA tax. This launders our tax dollars through KRESA and sends them to local school districts to get around restrictions on how much they can tax.

This post from 2008 is still relevant three years later.

-------------------

Stop the KRESA Tax

The most important issue on the ballot in Tuesday's election is the KRESA tax hike.

Despite the title, KRESA is simply being used as an intermediary to funnel money to local school districts based in Kalamazoo County. Three years ago, this tax was billed as a one-time emergency measure. Now, the schools want to renew it for another three years.

Advocates of the tax argue that quality education is essential to the community. But no one disputes this. The relevant question is whether passing the tax would improve education. This question is never addressed by advocates of the tax. They have not offered any such evidence.

The Gazette reports that advocates of the tax warn that all sorts of wonderful programs will be cut if the tax is not passed. This is an example of the Washington Monument strategy. That is, when there is a threat of cuts, bureaucrats threaten to cut the most popular programs instead of waste or unnecessary spending. (And why aren't there ever any newspaper stories about parents forced to take lollipops from their children because their taxes increased?)

In fact, the main result of increased school taxes are higher salaries and benefits for school employees. Increasing the salaries of the same people who have provided mediocre education won't help anything.

The biggest waste of tax dollars, though far from the only one, is the MESSA health insurance that the school districts purchase from the Michigan Education Association (MEA). Comparable coverage can be obtained for much less, and the difference goes to the MEA. It pressures school districts to use the expensive coverage. All nine Kalamazoo County school districts do so.

A Kalamazoo Gazette editorial admitted this problem and still urged that the tax be approved.

The primary donors to the campaign for the tax are the very people who stand to gain financially from its passage.

The KRESA tax richly deserves to be rejected.

-----------------

After the tax was approved three years ago, this blog predicted:

It doesn't take much foresight to see what will happen in the future. Government schools will continue to be mediocre. They will continue to waste money on MESSA insurance and lots of other things. Employee salaries and benefits will continue to increase. And there will be another dire fiscal emergency three years from now demanding renewal of this 'temporary' tax.

Vote NO on the Mattawan Tax Hike

The Mattawan government school district is demanding an 88 million dollar tax hike. This is 3.88 mills (a mill is one thousandth of the taxable value (half) of your property). This is not necessary and not affordable. With a poor economy and many people out of work, schools should learn to live within their means, just as private citizens must.

2011 ELECTION: Bond votes in South Haven, Mattawan; tax renewal in Kalamazoo County

POLITICAL UPDATE--Spending

This update focuses on spending.

Ann Coulter: Obama's Budget: More Waste, Fraud, and Self-Abuse
Gary North: You Are Getting Stiffed
Ron Paul: Spending Cuts Are Meaningless
Pat Buchanan: Barack Hussein Hoover
Pat Buchanan: Obama Blows up the Bridge
Michelle Malkin: America, the Dependent
Thomas Sowell: Another Spending Cut Plan
Dan Flynn: Shutdown Letdown

POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.

Guns Fight Crimes

Geoffrey Mattens, of Richland, charged with felony home invasion after being caught at gunpoint by Decatur homeowner

POLITICAL UPDATE--Immigration

This update focuses on immigration.

Washington Watcher: “Worse than A Crime—A Blunder”: Ron Paul’s Tragic Turnaround On Immigration
Phyllis Schlafly: Obama and Mexican Trucks
Washington Watcher: Good News—Legal Immigration Down in 2010. Bad News—It’s Still More Than A Million
Washington Watcher: Paez Without Honor— Hispanic Activist Judge Leads Attack On Arizona Law
Steve Sailer: Birthright Citizenship, Anarcho-Tyranny, And Beverly Hills Nativism
Allan Wall: Memo From Middle America (Formerly Known As Memo From Mexico): Birthright Citizenship—How Some Other Countries Handle It

For more on immigration, see VDARE.com.

Kalamazoo County Commission Redistricting Plan Adopted

While the Michigan legislature begins to consider redistricting of congressional and state legislative districts, counties across the state must also redraw county commission districts. The deadline to pass plans is much sooner than it is for the state legislature, so some counties have already completed the process and others are about to. Kalamazoo County adopted its new plan on Tuesday.

Kalamazoo County board's size will go from 17 to 11 districts in 2013
Apportionment committee created a 'well-balanced plan' for downsized Kalamazoo County Board, chairman says
Political landscape changes as Kalamazoo County board shrinks to 11 districts

The plan is decided by the county apportionment commission, which consists of the county prosecutor, treasurer, and clerk and the chairmen of the county Republican and democrat parties. In Kalamazoo, that’s Jeff Fink, Mary Balkema, Tim Snow, Al Heilman, and Dave Pawloski. The first four are Republicans. Fink was elected chairman of the commission at an earlier meeting.

There is a law governing how districts must be drawn. It sets forth a number of general standards but is fairly vague about how exactly to measure them and how much deviation is acceptable. Probably the only inviolable standards are that districts must be contiguous and must have roughly equal population. We will examine these standards in more detail below.

Unlike congressional or legislative redistricting, the number of county commissioners is not fixed. It can vary, with the range depending on the population of the county. The apportionment commission gets to set the number of commissioners.

At an earlier meeting, the Kalamazoo apportionment commission decided that it wanted to reduce the number of commissioners. The number of commissioners is currently 17, which the apportionment commission felt made the county commission meetings too unwieldy. This was an increase from 9 commissioners in the 1990s.

It isn’t entirely clear why the number had been increased. There was speculation that then-prosecutor Jim Gregart thought that it would help Republicans win a majority. If so, it had at best mixed success, with Republicans winning a 10-7 majority in 2002, 2004, and 2010, while having an 8-9 minority in 2006 and 2008.

Any member of the commission was free to submit a plan. Snow submitted plans for 7, 9, 11, and 13 districts. Balkema submitted plans for 9 and 11 districts. So did Pawloski. After a bit of discussion, the commission settled on 11 districts. Balkema’s 11-district plan was supported by Heilman, while Snow was unhappy with the fact that the map split Oshtemo between two districts. Pawloski wasn’t thrilled with the map but was willing to support it if he could modify the districts in the democratic areas of Kalamazoo city and township.

Snow and Pawloski presented their own 11-district maps. Other members of the committee criticized these plans for having districts that contain parts of both Kalamazoo and Portage. After some discussion, the commission adopted the Balkema plan with Pawloski’s amendments. The vote was unanimous, though Snow voiced displeasure with some aspects of the plan.

Here is Balkema’s original plan.



Here is the revised plan, which was adopted by the commission.


Here is the statute governing county commission redistricting.

Consider the standards for the final plan.
A. All districts shall be single-member districts and as nearly of equal population as is practicable.

What is practicable? There is some ambiguity here. Republican Michigander has stated that a court case found 11.9% deviation to be the maximum allowable. Certainly some deviation is allowed to avoid breaking precincts or city/township boundaries.

The plan adopted complies well with this standard. The lowest deviation is -3.68% in district 11, and the highest is +3.74% in district 3. The total range of 7.42% is quite reasonable. Based on playing around with various maps, this blog found it quite difficult to get below a 7% range.

B. All districts shall be contiguous.

They are.

C. All districts shall be as compact and of as nearly square shape as is practicable, depending on the geography of the county area involved.

This is ambiguous. What is ‘practicable’? How do you measure compactness? There are multiple possible mathematical definitions of compactness and ‘squareness’, and the statute does not specify a standard.

The districts in the map all appear to be reasonably compact, with no outrageous gerrymandering in evidence.

D. No township or part thereof shall be combined with any city or part thereof for a single district, unless such combination is needed to meet the population standard.

Again this is somewhat ambiguous. There are four cities in Kalamazoo County: Kalamazoo, Portage, Parchment, and Galesburg. The final map has five districts that contain territory from both city and township. Balkema’s original plan had only three, but it had a slightly larger population variation (7.63%).

E. Townships, villages, and cities shall be divided only if necessary to meet the population standard.

Again it is ambiguous exactly what is ‘necessary’. Both the Balkema and final plan divide four jurisdictions, Kalamazoo, Portage, Kalamazoo Township, and Oshtemo. These are the four largest jurisdictions. Balkema’s plan had one district that contained part of Kalamazoo city and the rest in K Township, one district that contained part of Portage and four townships, and Kalamazoo and Oshtemo townships each split between two districts. Pawlowski amended this so that there are four districts that split K Township, three of which contain parts of Kalamazoo and one contains part of Oshtemo and Alamo.

F. Precincts shall be divided only if necessary to meet the population standard.

No precincts are divided.

G. Residents of state institutions who cannot by law register in the county as electors shall be excluded from any consideration of representation.

There are no state prisons in Kalamazoo County, so this is a moot point.

H. Districts shall not be drawn to effect partisan political advantage.

No one would ever dream of such a thing.

Now let’s consider the plan passed in detail. What follows are descriptions of the districts, which incumbent commissioners live in the districts, and who is most likely to win in the future. To get some idea of the voting histories of the districts, this blog picked three past competitive countywide races and computed their outcomes in the districts. The races are the 2010 Secretary of State race (Johnson v. Benson), the 2008 county treasurer race (Balkema v. Kaufmann), and the 2006 state senate race (George v. Lipsey).

District 1
Kalamazoo city 1, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 17 and Kalamazoo Township 10, 13. Basically this is downtown, Northside, Eastside, Edison, and Douglas. This is the minority-majority district, with 43.3% white and 56.7% minority, including 40.3% black.
Carolyn Alford and Robert Barnard are the incumbents here. Alford is black, so she is likely to continue to dominate this district.
20% Johnson
19% Balkema
20% George
Safe Democrat

District 2
Kalamazoo city 3, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24 and Kalamazoo Township 11. [Milwood, Crosstown, Edison]
David Buskirk, Jack Urban. Buskirk is heavily favored here, as this greatly resembles the district he held in the 90s when there were 9 commissioners.
33% Johnson
38% Balkema
36% George
Safe Democrat

District 3
Kalamazoo city 2, 4, 12, 19, 22, 25, 26, 28 [Westnedge Hill, Parkview Hills, Oakwood, Winchell, Knollwood, WMU campus]
John Taylor. This resembles Taylor’s current district, with WMU and Westnedge Hill added.
37% Johnson
37% Balkema
40% George
Safe Democrat

District 4
Kalamazoo city 5, 6, 10, Parchment, and Kalamazoo Township 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 14, 15 [Arcadia, Westwood, Northwood, Parchment, Spring Valley]
Brian Johnson, Michael Seals. This district contains more of Johnson’s old district, so he would be favored if he runs for reelection.
42% Johnson
40% Balkema
41% George
Safe Democrat

District 5
Kalamazoo Township 3, 6, 9, Oshtemo 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, Alamo [Westwood, northern and western Oshtemo, Alamo]
Open. This district contains part of four districts currently represented by Iden, Buchholz, Johnson, and Seals.
57% Johnson
55% Balkema
56% George
Safe Republican

District 6
Cooper, Richland, Ross Townships
Deb Buchholz, Jeff Heppler. Heppler represents somewhat more of this district and would likely be favored if he runs for reelection. He might be interested in running for Sheriff instead. He ran in 1998 and applied for the position in 2002.
63% Johnson
60% Balkema
58% George
Safe Republican

District 7
Comstock, Galesburg, Charleston, Climax, Wakeshma
Ann Nieuwenhuis. This contains all of her district and half of John Gisler’s. It is safer than her current district.
59% Johnson
57% Balkema
55% George
Safe Republican

District 8
Portage 2, Pavilion, Brady, Schoolcraft, Prairie Ronde
John Gisler, David Maturen. This has all of Maturen’s current district, and half of Gisler’s. Geography favors Maturen if he runs for reelection. But since Maturen is somewhat moderate, Gisler could have an ideological advantage in a Republican primary.
64% Johnson
61% Balkema
59% George
Safe Republican

District 9
Oshtemo 4, 5, 7, 8, Texas Township
Tim Rogowski, Brandt Iden. Rogowski has a geographic advantage and a bigger partisan geographic advantage, since most of the Republicans in the district are in Texas. Rogowski could potentially be vulnerable to a more conservative challenger. Iden could conceivably move to the open district 5.
63% Johnson
59% Balkema
61% George
Safe Republican

District 10
Portage 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21 [Western Portage]
Phil Stinchcomb. This contains all of his current district and pieces from Ansari and Rogowski. It is a bit safer than his current district.
59% Johnson
58% Balkema
61% George
Safe Republican

District 11
Portage 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 15, 17, 20 [Eastern Portage]
John Zull, Nasim Ansari. This has all of Zull’s district and half of Ansari’s. Zull is expected to retire at the end of his term, leaving the district to Ansari. Ansari could conceivably run for drain commissioner, which he applied for in 2007.
57% Johnson
56% Balkema
57% George
Safe Republican

Overall, this map appears quite likely to lead to a 7-4 Republican majority for the next decade.

Paul Maier Retires

The great Paul Maier, WMU history professor for 50 years and Christian apologist, is retiring. Western has been blessed to have him. I hope he has many more productive years in whatever he chooses to pursue next.

Professor Paul Maier on teaching for a half century at WMU: 'Too much fun' (with video)

Jesse Jackson at Western

Jesse Jackson spoke at Western on Monday. I'm sure if anybody noticed. The Gazette reports the crowd as 'over 200'. Ann Coulter got over 2000.

Rev. Jesse Jackson urges crowd at Western Michigan University to push back against education cuts (with video)

The comments are highly unsympathetic.

Stun Gun Ban is Unconstitutional

A local judge has ruled that Michigan's ban on stun guns is unconstitutional. Michigan is one of only seven states that ban stun guns. The case while probably be appealed, but is nonetheless a victory for freedom.

UPDATE: Bay County judge says Second Amendment protects Bay City man's right to possess stun guns

Julie Mack exposes Rachel Maddow's Lies

Liberal columnist Julie Mack has written a devastating column ripping apart the report that Rachel Maddow aired on the Benton Harbor Emergency Financial Manager controversy.

Column: The facts in Benton Harbor get in the way of a good story for Rachel Maddow

This blog's only question is why Mack would think that any of Maddow's other reports are any more accurate.

POLITICAL UPDATE--The Culture War

This update focuses on the culture war.

Steve Sailer: Census 2010: Hispanic Hype, Black Backwash, White Flight
Thomas Sowell: Voting With Their Feet
Gary North: The Most Important Unanswered Historical Question in the World: 'What Changed in 1800?'
Gary North: What Made America Great
Steve Sailer: Population Paradoxes—A Post-Anglo America Might Vote For Big Government, But Couldn't Afford It. What then?
Steve Sailer: National Journal’s Ronald Brownstein Confirms Sailer Strategy
Phyllis Schlafly: VAWA Is an Excellent Target for Spending Cuts
Gary North: Still Out of Step After All These Years

POLITICAL UPDATES are archived here.

Michigan Redistricting: State House Part II: Oakland and Genesee

The first part of my analysis of redistricting the Michigan state house focused on Wayne County. That article contains the basics on the rules that any map must follow.

Michigan Redistricting: State House Part I: Wayne County

In particular, a good map avoids county breaks when possible. We have seen that districts in Wayne County can be drawn to avoid a break. This is also true for Washtenaw, Livingston, Ingham, and Lapeer Counties.

Part II begins by considering Oakland County. It is technically possible to avoid breaking Oakland, but only by significantly overpopulating its districts, which would lead to more city/township breaks, which must also be avoided.

Currently, Oakland has about 13.2 districts, sharing one township with a district mostly contained in Livingston County. Population growth in Livingston means that it no longer needs to be broken. The ideal number of districts for Oakland is now 13.38.

Oakland borders Genesee to the northwest. Genesee currently has five districts. It just barely avoided a break in 2000 by having district populations well under the ideal and just barely above the threshold. Population loss in Genesee, particularly in Flint, means that Genesee must now be broken. Its ideal number of districts is now 4.74.

Hence it works well the combine Oakland and Genesee so that one house district contains parts of both of them. These counties will share 18 districts with an ideal population of 90453.

See the current map here: MICHIGAN'S 110 HOUSE DISTRICTS

Populations were quite stable in southeastern Oakland, and my proposed districts don’t change much from the current map. The city of Pontiac did lose about 8000, and Southfield lost 6500. Both are democrat, black-majority areas. Population grew in north and west Oakland, leading to a reshuffling of the districts there. Among the biggest gainers were Novi, Commerce, and Oxford.

Meanwhile, population dropped by 10000 in Genesee. Flint lost 22500, and Flint, Mt. Morris, and Genesee townships each lost about 2000 meanwhile, Grand Blanc Township, a Republican area, gained about 8000.

There are currently two black-majority districts based in Southfield and Flint and my map easily maintains them.

Oakland County currently has six democrats and 7.2 Republicans. Only one district, the West Bloomfield/Commerce district (39) has changed parties all decade. That district is a tossup and the Waterford district (43) leans Republican. The rest are safe for their respective parties.

Genesee has four democrats and one Republican. The democrats are all safe and the southern tier (Grand Blanc, Fenton) district 51 leans Republican.

Given population shifts, a reasonable goal for Republicans is to win back district 39, secure Waterford (43) and draw a Republican district containing parts of Genesee and Oakland. My proposed map accomplishes all three goals. The Pontiac district (29) loses Auburn Hills and adds about 30000 people from democrat areas of West Bloomfield. The Waterford district loses its part of West Bloomfield and adds Springfield. (These townships do share more than a point in common due to an offset, i.e. they don’t quite align horizontally.) The new district 50 contains the eastern townships of Genesee and Thetford plus Brandon and Oxford from Oakland (it also uses an offset). This district should lean Republican.

Here are the maps. Amazingly, there are only three city/township breaks. They are in West Bloomfield, Oakland Township, and Flint. This is the absolute minimum possible.

Ratings and descriptions for the map:
26. Safe D [Royal Oak, Madison Heights]
27. Safe D [Oak Park, Ferndale, Hazel Park]
29. Safe D [Pontiac, SE West Bloomfield]
35. Safe D [Southfield]
37. Safe D [Farmington]
38. Safe R [Novi, Lyon]
39. Lean R(+) [W West Bloomfield, Commerce, Wixom]
40. Safe R [Bloomfield, Auburn Hills]
41. Safe R [Troy, Clawson]
43. Safe R(+) [Waterford, Springfield]
44. Safe R [Milford, Highland, White Lake, Rose, Holly, Groveland]
45. Safe R [Rochester, S Oakland Twp]
46. Safe R [Independence, Orion, Addison, N Oakland Twp]

34. Safe D [Flint]
48. Safe D [Burton, Genesee, Mt. Morris, Vienna]
49. Safe D [western column, Flint Twp]
50. Lean R(+++) [eastern column, Thetford, Brandon, Oxford]
51. Lean R [Grand Blanc, Mundy, Fenton]

Hence we have the following ratings:

Rating: SR/LR/TU/LD/SD
Old……. 6 / 2 / 1 / 0 / 9
New…… 7 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 8

Previous articles on Michigan redistricting:
Michigan Congressional Redistricting: Two Possible Maps
Michigan Redistricting: Two Possible State Senate Maps
Michigan Redistricting: State House Part I: Wayne County

Michigan Redistricting: State House Part I: Wayne County

Along with congressional and state senate maps, the state legislature will also redistrict the state house of representatives. The current state house map was drawn by Republicans, but has hardly any partisan slant at all. Its architects thought it would elect a large Republican majority, but control shifted to democrats in 2006 and 2008 before returning to Republicans in 2010.

Michigan Congressional Redistricting: Two Possible Maps
Michigan Redistricting: Two Possible State Senate Maps

See the current state house map here: MICHIGAN'S 110 HOUSE DISTRICTS

State house control is more likely to vary since representatives are limited to three two-year terms and elections are held in both presidential and off-years, unlike the state senate.

Many of the rules for legislative district maps are the same as for congressional district maps. In particular, the Apol standards require that there be a small number of county and city/township breaks. These standards cannot legally bind future redistricting plans (LaRoux v. Secretary of State), but it is likely that any plan passed will at least come close to following them.

One major difference between the congressional and legislative standards is that populations for legislative districts are not required to be exact. They must be within 5% of the ideal population. For the Michigan House of Representatives, the ideal population is 9983640/110=89851. The lower and upper thresholds are thus 85359 and 94343.

This makes it easier to avoid breaks. Many counties do not need to be broken at all. The first part of my analysis of the state house redistricting will focus on Wayne County. Wayne’s ideal number of districts is 20.26, so the ideal population for a district is 91029.

The Voting Rights Act is commonly understood to require black-majority districts when possible. There are currently ten black-majority districts based in Detroit and one each in Southfield and Flint. There is also one significantly Hispanic district in southern Detroit. Given that Detroit lost 220000 people out of the 240000 loss in Wayne County, Wayne County will lose three house seats, dropping from 23 to 20. Three districts must be shifted elsewhere in the state.

Detroit really should lose two or three black districts, but don’t expect Eric Holder to agree with that. It is possible to maintain eight black districts while minimizing the number of breaks, or keep ten black districts with some creative line-drawing and a larger number of breaks.

Republicans will want to improve their prospects as much as possible. In the 2002 election, they won five seats and came close in two others. The five they held were the Grosse Pointes, Dearborn, Livonia, Plymouth/Northville, and Canton. The two that were close are Redford and the southern tier. The Grosse Pointes flipped in 2008. The population of this district needs to expand, and can only add part of Detroit. Demographic changes (blacks moving in from Detroit) mean this district is now out of reach. The same is true for the Redford district.

The Dearborn district flipped in 2004 due to Muslim reaction against Bush. The Plymouth/Northville district flipped in 2006 due in part to the treachery of RINO John Stewart, but flipped back in 2010. The Canton district flipped in 2008. The southern tier district was finally won by Republicans in 2010.

Both maps below are the same in Western Wayne. The Livonia district is the entire city except a small corner in the southwest. The Canton district loses VanBuren and is now just Canton, which makes it more favorable to Republicans. The Plymouth/Northville district loses Wayne and adds part of Westland, making it a bit more favorable. The southern tier district loses Sumpter, making it a bit more favorable. Republicans have a reasonable chance of winning four districts.

The first map below has eight black majority districts. It breaks Detroit in four places and four other cities (Livonia, Dearborn, Westland, Taylor).



The second map below has ten black majority districts. It adds three more breaks in Detroit and one more break (Dearborn Heights) outside.

Note that it is just barely possible to create a Hispanic majority district, but only by breaking four jurisdictions (Detroit, River Rouge, Ecorse, Lincoln Park).

My ratings for both maps:
1. Safe D(-) [Grosse Pointes]
2-15, 17 Safe D
16. Tossup [Southern Tier]
18. Safe R [Livonia]
19. Lean R(+) [Canton]
20. Safe R(++) [Plymouth/Northville]

For Republicans, the biggest benefit in Wayne County is the fact that three of its districts will move to more favorable parts of the state.

POLITICAL UPDATE--The Economy

This update focuses on the economy.

Gary North: Wealth Through Decentralization
Gary North: Insider Trading: A Bum Rap
Gary North: Bernanke Is Riding the Tiger
Gary North: Interest Rates on the Rise
James Ryan: The Strange Tale of Obama, The Teamsters, The Sierra Club—And Those Cheap, Dirty, Dangerous Mexican Trucks
Gary North: Gold or Uniformed Goons With Badges and Guns
Phyllis Schlafly: Death for Innovation
Gary North: Enemies of the Middle Class
Gary North: Gold Has No Intrinsic Value
Gary North: Booms, Busts, and Food Prices

See also:
Gary North series: What is Money?
The Recession Reader
The Bailout Reader

POLITICAL UPDATE--Liberalism

This update focuses on liberalism.

Ann Coulter: Thanks For Raising My Taxes--What Else Can I Do For You?
Ann Coulter: Liberals: They Blinded Us With Science
Thomas Sowell: Union Myths
Ann Coulter: Six-Figure Bus Drivers & Other Working-Class Heroes
Dan Flynn: Spies Like Us
Andrew McCarthy: Jean-Jacques Jihad
Phyllis Schlafly: Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic
Michelle Malkin: De-Fund The Predators Of Planned Parenthood
James Fulford: They’ll Think You’re Signaling! Dog-Whistles From Goldwater To Reagan To Palin

Much information on liberal individuals and organizations can be found at David Horowitz's Discover the Network site.

Michigan Redistricting: Two Possible State Senate Maps

With the release of Michigan’s census numbers last month, redistricting season is well underway. I previously proposed two congressional district maps, and Republican Michigander has offered his 10-4 plan as well.

Michigan Congressional Redistricting: Two Possible Maps
Dan's 10-4 GOP Redistricting Map Part one (1-5) Part two (6-10) Part three (10-14)

While congressional lines attract the most attention, state legislative lines will also be redrawn. This article proposes two possible maps for the Michigan state senate. The state senate is particularly key since it has been the bulwark against total democrat control in Michigan since 1983.

Many of the rules for legislative district maps are the same as for congressional district maps. In particular, the Apol standards require that there be a small number of county and city/township breaks. These standards cannot legally bind future redistricting plans (LaRoux v. Secretary of State), but it is likely that any plan passed will at least come close to following them.

One major difference between the congressional and legislative standards is that populations for legislative districts are not required to be exact. They must be within 5% of the ideal population. For the Michigan Senate, the ideal population is 9983640/38=260095. The lower and upper thresholds are thus 247091 and 273100.

This makes it much easier to avoid breaks. In particular, there are only six counties that must have breaks. They are Oakland, Macomb, Kent, Genesee, Washtenaw, and Ingham. The second map below shows that it is possible to have a map with only six breaks.

The Voting Rights Act is commonly understood to require black-majority districts when possible. There are currently five black-majority districts based in Detroit. Given that Detroit lost 220000 people out of the 240000 loss in Wayne County, Wayne will lose a senate seat, dropping from 8 to 7. Detroit really should lose a black district, but don’t expect Eric Holder to agree with that. It is possible to maintain five black districts with some creative line-drawing.

Redrawing the senate districts is a tricky problem. Small shifts in population can lead a district above or below the population thresholds. Because of the need to avoid breaks, this can require drastic changes in the districts. This is all too likely to lead to two incumbents ending up in the same district.

This is particularly true since Republicans now hold 26 of 38 senate seats. Only four of them are term-limited, so most will run for reelection. Some may have to move to avoid primary battles. This was not a problem when Republicans were redrawing districts in 2002, since almost all of the existing senators were term-limited.

First we review the existing senate districts. See a map of the districts below.

2001 State Senate Districts

The ratings that I give are for open seat races in off-year elections. Incumbents are generally stronger than nominees for open seats. Off-year elections are better for Republicans than presidential year elections. Term-limited senators are denoted TL.

1. Safe D [eastern Detroit] Coleman Young
2. Safe D [northern Detroit, Grosse Pointes] Bert Johnson
3. Safe D [central Detroit, Dearborn] Morris Hood
4. Safe D [central Detroit] Virgil Smith
5. Safe D [western Detroit] Tupak Hunter (TL)
6. Lean D [Livonia, Westland, Redford] Glenn Andersen (TL)
7. Lean R [western, southern Wayne County] Patrick Colbeck
8. Safe D [downriver Detroit suburbs] Hoon-Yung Hopgood
9. Safe D [southern Macomb County] Steven Bieda
10. Tossup [central Macomb County] Tory Rocca
11. Safe R [northern Macomb County] Jack Brandenburg
12. Safe R [northeastern Oakland County] Jim Marleau
13. Lean R [Troy, Royal Oak, Bloomfield] John Pappageorge (TL)
14. Safe D [southeastern Oakland County] Vincent Gregory
15. Safe R [southwestern Oakland County] Mike Kowall
16. Safe R [Lenewaee, Hillsdale, Branch, St. Joseph Counties] Bruce Caswell
17. Lean R [Monroe, parts of Washtenaw and Jackson Counties] Randy Richardville (TL)
18. Safe D [Washtenaw County] Rebekah Warren
19. Tossup [Calhoun, Jackson Counties] Mike Nofs
20. Lean R [Kalamazoo County] Tonya Schuitmaker
21. Safe R [Berrien, Cass, VanBuren Counties] John Proos
22. Safe R [Livingston, Shiawassee Counties] Joe Hune
23. Safe D [Ingham County] Gretchen Whitmer (TL)
24. Safe R [Allegan, Barry, Eaton Counties] Rick Jones
25. Safe R [St. Clair, Lapeer Counties] Phil Pavlov
26. Tossup [eastern Genesee, northwest Oakland Counties] David Robertson
27. Safe D [Flint, western Genesee County] John Gleason (TL)
28. Safe R [Kent County outside Grand Rapids] Mark Jansen (TL)
29. Tossup [Grand Rapids, Kentwood] Dave Hildenbrand
30. Safe R [Ottawa County] Arlan Meekhof
31. Tossup [the Thumb] Mike Green
32. Tossup [Saginaw, Gratiot Counties] Roger Khan (TL)
33. Safe R [Clinton, Ionia, Montcalm, Isabella Counties] Judy Emmons
34. Lean R [Muskegon, Newaygo, Oceana, Mason Counties] Geoff Hansen
35. Safe R [north-central Lower Peninsula] Darwin Booher
36. Lean R [northeastern Lower Peninsula, Midland] John Moolenaar
37. Safe R [northern Lower Peninsula, eastern upper peninsula] Howard Walker
38. Tossup [Upper Peninsula excluding Mackinac, Chippewa] Tom Casperson

The ratings break down to 13/6/7/1/11 from R to D.

Here is Map A. It has seven county breaks, counting Genesee as broken twice. As mentioned above, Wayne loses a seat. It’s a little tricky to designate the “new” seat, since every seat contains parts of existing seats, but I call it the VanBuren, Allegan, south Kent district. When possible, I tried to make Republican seats safer. However, a few actually got less safe due to population changes and county breaks. I denote a move one rating to the right by (+) and to the left by (-). The incumbent listed with a district is the one who represents the bulk of it, regardless whether he currently lives in the district.

1. Safe D [N Detroit, Grosse Pointes, Redford] Bert Johnson
2. Safe D [Detroit riverfront, Downriver] Coleman Young
3. Safe D [central Detroit, Lincoln Park, Southgate] (open?)
4. Safe D [West-central Detroit, Dearborn, Allen Park] Morris Hood
5. Safe D [W Detroit, Dearborn Heights, Taylor, Inkster] Tupak Hunter (TL)
6. Safe D(-) [SW Wayne, Westland] (open?)
7. Safe R(+) [Livonia, Canton, Plymouth, Northville] Patrick Colbeck
8. Safe R(++++) [VanBuren, Allegan, south Kent] (open)
9. Safe D [Warren, Roseville, S Clinton] Steven Bieda
10. Safe R(++) [Sterling Heights, Shelby, N Clinton] Tory Rocca
11. Safe R [N/E Macomb] Jack Brandenburg
12. Safe R [NE Oakland] Jim Marleau
13. Safe R(+) [Troy, Bloomfield, West Bloomfield, Commerce] John Pappageorge (TL)
14. Safe D [SE Oakland] Vincent Gregory
15. Safe R [SW Oakland] Mike Kowall
16. Safe R [Jackson, Hillsdale, Branch] Bruce Caswell
17. Tossup(-) [Monroe, Lenawee] Randy Richardville (TL)
18. Safe D [Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti] Rebekah Warren
19. Safe R(++) [Calhoun, Barry, Ionia] Mike Nofs
20. Tossup(-) [Kalamazoo County] Tonya Schuitmaker
21. Safe R [Berrien, Cass, St. Joseph] John Proos
22. Safe R [Livingston, W Washtenaw] Joe Hune
23. Safe D [Ingham] Gretchen Whitmer (TL)
24. Safe R [Eaton, Clinton, Shiawassee] Rick Jones
25. Safe R [St. Clair, Sanilac, Huron] Phil Pavlov
26. Safe R(++) [S Genesee, NW Oakland, Waterford] David Robertson
27. Safe D [Flint, central Genesee] John Gleason (TL)
28. Safe R [central Kent, Walker] Mark Jansen (TL)
29. Tossup [Grand Rapids, N Kent] Dave Hildenbrand
30. Safe R [Ottawa County] Arlan Meekhof
31. Lean R(+) [Bay, Tuscola, Lapeer] Mike Green
32. Lean D(-) [Saginaw, N/W Genesee] Roger Khan (TL)
33. Safe R [Montcalm, Isabella, Gratiot, Mecosta, Clare] Judy Emmons
34. Tossup(-) [Muskegon, Newaygo, Oceana] Geoff Hansen
35. Safe R [NC Lower Peninsula] Darwin Booher
36. Safe R(+) [northeastern Lower Peninsula, Midland] John Moolenaar
37. Safe R [N Lower Peninsula, E Upper Peninsula] Howard Walker
38. Tossup [Upper Peninsula excluding Mackinac, Chippewa, Luce] Tom Casperson

The breakdown for these districts is 20/1/5/1/11 from R to D. The map makes a lot of seats safer, but it almost surely sacrifices the Saginaw seat.

It would be possible to make some seats safer by adding more breaks. Specifically:

Splitting Grand Rapids between the two Kent seats
Trading Muskegon for E Ottawa
Trading N Kalamazoo (K Twp, Oshtemo, Comstock) for VanBuren

Map B has only six county breaks. It saves the Saginaw seat at the cost of dismantling Mike Green’s district. It changes about half the districts. The changes are

12. Safe R [N Oakland, Pontiac] Jim Marleau
13. Safe R(+) [Rochester, Troy, Royal Oak] John Pappageorge (TL)
14. Safe D [SE Oakland] Vincent Gregory
15. Safe R [Bloomfield, W Bloomfield, Waterford, White Lake] (open)
18. Safe D [Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti] Rebekah Warren
22. Safe R [Livingston, Shiawassee] Joe Hune
23. Safe D [Ingham] Gretchen Whitmer (TL)
24. Safe R [Eaton, Clinton, Gratiot, S Ingham] Rick Jones
26. Safe R(++) [S Genesee, Lapeer] David Robertson
27. Safe D [Flint, central Genesee] John Gleason (TL)
31. Safe R(++) [W Washtenaw, SW Oakland] Mike Kowall
32. Lean R(+) [Saginaw, Tuscola] Roger Khan/Mike Green
33. Safe R [Montcalm, Isabella, Clare, Osceola, Lake, Mason, Oceana] Judy Emmons
34. Lean R [Muskegon, Newaygo, Mecosta] Geoff Hansen
35. Safe R [central Lower Peninsula] (?)
36. Lean R [Bay, Midland, Gladwin, Arenac, Roscommon, Missaukee] John Moolenaar
37. Safe R [N Lower Peninsula, E Upper Peninsula] Howard Walker




The breakdown for these districts is 20/3/4/0/11 from R to D. The distribution is better, but many existing seats are carved up.

Which map do you prefer?