FiveThirtyEightFiveThirtyEight

PUBLISHED Jan. 25, 2018 at 6:00 AM

The Atlas Of Redistricting

By Aaron BycoffeElla KoezeDavid Wasserman and Julia Wolfe

There’s a lot of complaining about gerrymandering, but what should districts look like? We went back to the drawing board and drew a set of alternative congressional maps for the entire country. Each map has a different goal: One is designed to encourage competitive elections, for example, and another to maximize the number of majority-minority districts. See how changes to district boundaries could radically alter the partisan and racial makeup of the U.S. House — without a single voter moving or switching parties. How we did this »

Go To:
Partisan goals
Other goals

Show current district boundaries

Gerrymander districts to favor Republicans

Gerrymander districts to favor Democrats

Match partisan breakdown of seats to electorate

Promote highly competitive elections

Maximize number of majority-minority districts

Make district shapes compact (using an algorithm)

Make districts compact while following county borders

← National map

Chance of being represented by either party

100% D
100% R
Usually Democratic districts Highly competitive districts Usually Republican districts
Current
Usually Democratic districtsHighly competitive districtsUsually Republican districts
Current

Party probabilities

Every district by the chance it will be represented by either party

Dem. chancesGOP chances
Current
Democratic gerrymander
Compact (borders)
Compact (algorithmic)
Majority minority
Proportionally partisan
Republican gerrymander
Highly competitive

Expected seat split

The expected number of seats controlled by Democrats and Republicans, based on their long-term likelihood of winning each district

Current
Democratic gerrymander
Compact (borders)
Compact (algorithmic)
Majority minority
Proportionally partisan
Republican gerrymander
Highly competitive

How the maps compare on district competitiveness, minority makeup, respect for local borders, compactness and the efficiency gap, an attempt to gauge how politically gerrymandered a set of districts is

Efficiency gap
A measure of “wasted” votes, by the size of the advantage and which party it favors
Proportional0%
Competitive0%
GOP gerrymander0%
Compact (borders)D+28%
Dem. gerrymanderD+28%
Majority minorityD+28%
Compact (algorithmic)D+28%
CurrentD+28%
Competitive districts
Number of districts in which both parties have at least a 1-in-6 chance of winning
Compact (algorithmic)1
Proportional1
Majority minority1
GOP gerrymander1
Competitive1
Compact (borders)1
Current0
Dem. gerrymander0
Majority-nonwhite districts
Number of districts in which a majority of the voting-age population is nonwhite
Current0
Compact (algorithmic)0
Proportional0
Majority minority0
GOP gerrymander0
Dem. gerrymander0
Competitive0
Compact (borders)0
County splits
Number of times a map divides counties into different congressional districts
Compact (borders)1
Competitive1
Dem. gerrymander1
GOP gerrymander1
Majority minority1
Proportional1
Current1
Compact (algorithmic)2
Compactness rank
Rank by the total length of district boundaries, from shortest to longest
Competitive1
GOP gerrymander1
Proportional3
Compact (borders)4
Dem. gerrymander5
Current5
Majority minority7
Compact (algorithmic)8

The racial or ethnic makeup of each district and each district’s likelihood of being represented by a member of a racial or ethnic minority, based on election results since 2006

White
African-American
Hispanic/Latino
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
Minority coalition
Chance of being represented by a ...Chance of being represented by a ...
DistrictDistrictMajority Race
0%
50%
100%
Minority memberDemocratRepublican
1stWhite
5%99%1%
2ndWhite
3%85%15%

More from this series

METHODOLOGY

Methodology

We Drew 2,568 Congressional Districts By Hand. Here's How.

PODCAST & VIDEO

Podcast & Video

Gerrymandering 101

ESSAY

Essay

Hating Gerrymandering Is Easy. Why Is Fixing It So Hard?

Comments