The fourthirtysix map

The map shown in previous posts is a snapshot from a spreadsheet. Each house district and the District of Columbia is represented by a single square in the spreadsheet grid. House districts have more or less the same number of residents, about 700,000. The district population can be much smaller for single district states. For example, Wyoming’s at large district from the 2010 census has about 564,000 residents. Still, districts like this are drawn in the fourthirtysix map with the same size square. This is partly to keep things simple, and also to recognize that representation in the house is a fundamental aspect of American government.

Each square in the fourthirtysix map represents one house seat, and more or less an equal number of residents. Note this is not the same as the number of voters in any particular election, or those eligible to vote, and also includes non-citizens. House districts are apportioned based on the number of residents in each state, not the number of citizens.

This fundamental aspect of representation is worth emphasizing. Everyone living in the United States is represented in the Congress. This includes people who don’t vote, either by choice or due to other restrictions such as age and citizenship.

Districts on the map

The fourthirtysix map does not usually show the names of states or house district numbers. While it somewhat adheres to the positions of the states on an actual map, it makes no attempt to accurately represent the relative positions of house districts. This is impossible to do with a grid of equal size squares. This does not detract from the purpose of the map, which is to accurately represent election outcomes in a visual way.

To reduce clutter, the map does not normally show the names of states or district numbers. These are not essential to the purpose of the map. But it would be difficult validate any of the data presented here without this information, so below is a map with the squares filled in with the state names and district numbers. The state abbreviation is shown in house district 1 or at-large district, and the rest of the squares for each state show the district numbers.

Color schemes

As shown in The House That Divides Us the fourthirtysix map aims to represent the nuances in election results or other data. Single shades of red or blue are not sufficient to represent the district outcomes contests such as the 2016 election for the House of Representatives.

Data is presented with a smooth progression of 100 shades of blue and 100 shades of red. The scheme also accommodates contests that are decided by a simple plurality, which can happen when there more than two candidates in a contest. For these cases, the very lightest shades or red are blue are used to indicate the winning party.

The scale is shown below. An absolute majority win, even with just slightly more than 50% of the overall vote, is shown in the map with a visibly discernable, albeit very light, shade of red or blue. For a simple plurality win, lighter shades are used, with nearly white being shown for the lowest plurality result across all house races. That is 44.3% for the Democrat who won the at-large New Hampshire district.

Normally, people cite vote margin of the top two vote getters. This is convenient, but it does not represent all of the votes. The math for the fourthirtysix map calculates the margin of victory based on all of the votes. That is 44.3 - 65.7% = -11.4%. This is drawn almost pure white on the map, as shown in the center of the color scale below.

Logo and test data

The figure below shows a spreadsheet test of the fourthirtysix map. Each house district is assigned number, starting with 1 for Alaska and ending with 436 for Wyoming, and these are drawn to show the number as a shade or organge. This test map also happens to the be the source for the fourthirtysix logo, which is drawn by using boxes in the center of the map as very large pixels.

Count all of the votes

Some winners love a simple map.

Reuters photo

It goes without saying, in a functional democracy, all of the votes must be counted. But often the presentation of the vote count is oversimplified, and fails to show large components of disagreement from the final result.

Simple presentations such as a solid red/blue area map just add fuel to an us vs. them conversation. They do not represent the we as in we the people. It is not written as we the winners.