Polling Gap - Dittman Confirms It's the Biggest

A Dittman poll predicted 50% for and 41% against Prop. 5 a week before the April 3 Anchorage Municipal election.  The actual outcome was 58% no and 42% for - a 17% switch in the 'no' votes.

That seemed like a huge switch in a week.  Polling has gotten to be pretty sophisticated and more accurate in recent years.  When all the other issues in this election began to come out - see Bent and  Mudflats  - this seemed to be another anomaly that should be in the mix to be checked out.

So, when I saw that Dittman would be on a panel with the other two best known Anchorage pollsters, I wanted to take the opportunity to see whether this was, as it seemed to me, the biggest difference between polling outcome and election outcome so close to the election.

I got the chance to ask.  I had to ask three times before Dittman confirmed my suspicion.  I've tried to focus just on that part of the video.


[UPDATE 4/29/12 - Someone suggested I add the transcript from the video.

Steve:  Can you think of an election where there was such a big shift [from the poll prediction to the election outcome]?
Dittman:  No.  The answer is no.  I think if you look back historically, the polls have been pretty darned good.  We have on our website the graphic tracks, we have the final poll and the election, it’s just within a percent. It’s dead on. And I think if you look back over time, the polls have been pretty darn reliable.  And in this case you’ve got like a ten percent shift or maybe even twenty . . .
Steve:  Well, it’s almost twenty for the no people.
Dittman:  Yeah.  When you look . .I think that’s one of the highest I can remember.]

Does this even matter?

Some people I've talked to about what I'm calling anomalies in the election have said, "So what? That doesn't prove anything." But I'm working on the grounds that when you're in a situation and you notice things that seem unusual or abnormal, these are signs that something may be amiss. "How to develop Sherlock Holmes intutition" at WikiHow talks about reading the situation.

Understand how to read a situation. There are three parts to reading a situation:

• See. What do you see that is happening? 

• Observe. What do you notice that is different; a stain, a crease? 

• Deduce. What does this imply?

See:   We had an election that ran out of ballots and people were turned away.
Observe:  This is the step that I and other bloggers are going through.  We're looking for things that are different.  The polling gap is one of five or six 'differences.'  In this case it is the extreme variation between the predicted and actual outcome of the election - a greater variation than veteran Anchorage pollster Dave Dittman can remember.
Deduce:  The 17 point shift among 'no' voters - from 41% no to 58% no - that something is different here from other elections.  The two obvious implications are:

1. The polling was inaccurate or
2. The vote counting was inaccurate.

[NOTE:  Never be taken in by such either/or options.  There are others (i.e. it just was an odd set of circumstances, like winning the lottery), but for now these are the key ones and most of the others are subsets of these.

The panelists in the video, all pollsters, focused on their area of expertise (polling) and discussed what could have gone wrong with the polling.

• Polls asked wrong questions - focus on discrimination v. focus on freedom;  use of term gay v. homosexual - will all result in different responses 
• Voters changed their minds - negative campaigning - the panel suggested the no campaign might have frightened voters and the yes campaign may have irritated voters
• Size of turnout -  Craciun said that the low percentage of people who vote in general is a serious problem.  Moore said this was the highest turnout election.  (In the end, the turnout edged out the 2006 Mayoral race by 240 ballots, and Prop. 5 had the most people voting.)

Nevertheless, all these possible polling errors can happen at every election and these are experienced pollsters who can explain the ways polls go bad and are paid to avoid these types of bias in their polling. At this election, Dave Dittman agreed this was the highest deviation between what was predicted and the outcome in a week's time [that he could remember.] 


The other option: there was an irregularity in the election itself and how the votes were counted. 

This all came to light when polling places ran out of ballots.  We also know that Jim Minnery sent out emails to evangelical Christians telling them they could register on the day of the election, even though he'd previously sent out an email telling them to get registered 30 days before or they wouldn't be able to vote.
We also have reports of broken seals on ballot boxes and the deputy clerk in charge of the elections telling a polling worker not to worry about the broken seals.

Back to the Sherlock Holmes webpage:

"It is the highest importance in the art of detection to be able to recognize out of a number of facts, which are incidental and which are vital."[7]. And don't dismiss the smallest details - Holmes made it clear that "The little things are infinitely the most important."[8]

There are lots of individual pieces.  Some, like the broken seals and the missing ballots, should call for an investigation on their own.  Elections are simply too important to not make sure that any problems this time, won't happen again.

This time, the vote was not close in any particular race.  Thus, the investigators need not worry about the political consequences of their findings.  Though there are potential consequences for individuals who may have fallen down on the job.  Higher level public administrators are not merely supposed to do things the way they've always been done, they are expected to be aware that the world is constantly changing and they have to be adapting to those changes.  Based on the video I did with former elections head, Lupe Marroquin, some good things from the past weren't done and some new bad things were.

In any case, I'm adding this long explanation so that people understand that the video, which raises the issue of the gap between the predicted outcome and the actual outcome is simply one of many clues that, all together, raise serious questions about the integrity of the election.

When there is an accident, the police can conclude it was simply an accident and move on, or they can notice clues that suggest that perhaps there was more to it.  I'm just saying, along with others, that there are enough clues, little things that are out of place out there, that suggest there is possibly something more than just an accident.

The Assembly Chair seems to agree, because he's going to appoint an investigator.  I'm just adding this bit of evidence into the mix so that it's considered during the investigation.

Board Votes to Appeal to Supreme Court and Authorize Attorney to Submit Interim Plan

Essentially they met in executive session to discuss litigation and then in open session they moved:
1.  To appeal the Superior Court decision to the Supreme Court
2.  Authorize the attorney to submit the Interim plan for adoption.

This is quick and dirty.  Here are my rough notes from today's board meeting.  Recognize they are just a rough image of what was said.


Redistricting Board

11:41  Roll call - after problems getting Marie Greene connected from Canada.  In Anchorage only Board member is John Torgerson.  The others are all here via teleconference.

Staff - Michael White, Taylor Bickford, and

White:  Submitted Amended Proclamation.  Last Friday it disagreed with how we interpreted the Hickel Process.  Didn’t say we should have done the whole state over, but did say we should have reviewed each district.  Also problem with District 32.  Bottom line:  We didn’t follow the Hickel process at the first level.  Have to make findings on each and every district.  Then plan goes back to him and he approves the constitutional issues and then it comes back and we go from there. 
We didn’t follow first process of Hickel Process.

Decision today is to appeal or comply.  That’s what we’ll decided in executive session today. 

Torgerson:  Questions of Mr. White. 
Hearing none, we’ll go to item 5.  Motion to go into Executive Session to discuss strategy to go to the supreme court. 
Roll Call:  5-0 yea

11:46 - disconnect from teleconference and clear the room and we should be back on in a few minutes. 

12:26pm  Board room now opening and setting up the bridge for the teleconference.
12:28 back in session. 
Motions out there?
PeggyAnn McConnochie:  Authorize counsel to appeal trial court’s ruling to the supreme court.
Holm:  Second.
No discussion.  Vote 5-0 in favor.
PeggyAnn McConnochie:  Move to authorize counsel to petition the court to institute the interim plan.
Holm:  Second
Discussion:  None   vote 5-0 yea

PAM: Motion to adjourn:
12:31 adjourned.

[UPDATE 3:30pm -  Here are links to the Interim Plan - statewide and closer look at Fairbanks in the Interim Plan. These are from a redistricting board post dated April 5, 2012.]

Alutiq Baskets - Primitive and Advanced - Flawed Concepts

Often people in so called 'advanced' countries feel, at least subconsciously if not consciously, superior to the people in 'third world' or 'less advanced' countries.  Having dropped back in time, technologically, as a Peace Corps volunteer in Thailand in the late 1960s, I quickly learned that Thais had many advanced skills I couldn't ever hope to match.

I thought about this while watching this new video released by Frontier Scientists in a series of films of Alutiq basket weaving.  In Thailand there were many 'simple' basketry products.  But I would challenge the vast majority of Americans to create even a simple basket on your own, even after googling basket weaving.

How many of us, if we had never seen or heard of something called a woven basket, could even imagine, when looking at the grasses, that this could be turned into a beautiful and useful object?





This video is just about collecting and curing the grasses.  There are six more videos on Alutiq weavers.  You can see a 500 year old basket in the second video (Karluk One Baskets).

Alutiiq Weavers

[ video ] Collecting and Curing Grass
[ video ] Karluk One Baskets
[ video ] Coral’s Cabinet
[ video ] Coral’s Basket Feat: Russian Inspired
[ video ] My Little Basket
[ video ] Where Are My Grass Socks?
[ video ] Teaching and Learning the Art of Basket Weaving

Coming to appreciate the imagination, the knowledge, the technical skill, and the social bonds necessary to create the objects used by pre-industrialized peoples helps us recognize that there aren't superior and inferior peoples.  Rather all human societies  have a range of people with and without many talents and many flaws.

Progress, for me, in this world is figuring out how societies can create environments which promote those qualities that foster the talents that lead to happy communities (really all the other things - prosperity, health, loving families - are means to the end of happiness) and minimize the human flaws that hinder happiness.

Every culture, every human, has aspects of being 'advanced' and 'primitive.'  Recognizing that all cultures have some unique knowledge and skill is the first step toward recognizing we are all equals in this world, which itself is the first step to respect and humility. 

By the way, I imagine most people in the world have no idea who the Alutiq people are.  The Alutiq Museum and Archeological Repository has a great website.  In the Educational Handouts section of the Resources page I found a link  with a page of explanation of names used to identify alutiq people.  Here's a part of that page:

alutiiq – “Alutiiq” is the way Sugpiaq people say Aleut. It is the Native way of pronouncing the Russian-introduced word “Aleut” in their own language. Alutiiq is a popular self- designator in Kodiak, and reflects the region’s complex Russian and Native history.” People used this term occasionally in the Russian era. It gained popularity starting in the 1980s.

 Here are some other links on that page:

• The Alutiiq Nation
• Who Are Alutiiq?
• Let’s all Study Alutiiq
• Villages
• Houses
• Social Classes
• Marriage

 

Agenda Item 4 Should Be Interesting

The redistricting board meets at 11:30 Tuesday, April 24.  I don't imagine it will be a long meeting, but it should be interesting when the attorney talks about the decision.  You can listen in by calling  1-855-463-5009, or via live stream at  www.aklegislature.tv.

The board members were not at all pleased with the Supreme Court's decision that had them redo their Proclamation Plan.

They revised it, though they were clearly annoyed.

But Judge McConahy has just ruled in drawing the second proclamation plan, they had not complied with the letter or the spirit of the Supreme Court's charge to follow the "Hickel Process" meaning they had to first draw districts that met the Alaska constitutional requirements.  Only then could they make the most minimal adjustments necessary to the constitutional standards, so that it complies with the federal Voting Rights Act.  McConahy basically told them to start from scratch.

The board is clearly not going to be in a good mood.  The Supreme Court has to rule on whether any state constitutional deviations are necessary to comply with the VRA and are the absolute minimal necessary.  Without a benchmark plan that is constitutional, they argued, how can they tell if the final plan does the least violation to the constitutional requirements?  I understand that, but having watched the board working on these maps, I recognize that this is not an easy process.  I think that they have to make the constitutional plan, but they cannot do it without keeping the VRA requirements in mind. 

Here's the agenda for the meeting. 

BOARD MEETING AGENDA

Tuesday, April 24, 2012, 11:30 AM
Teleconference
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

4. LEGAL OVERVIEW OF SUPERIOR COURT DECISION 

5. EXECUTIVE SESSION
6. ADJOURNMENT

The legal overview, presumably presented by board attorney Michael White, will, I suspect, be the highlight of the meeting.

I would also guess that this new plan will not be ready in time for the June 1 candidate filing deadline for the November election.  If not, the interim plan would go into effect.  But will it be the interim plan they submitted with this recently rejected plan?  Or the original proclamation plan?  Or will there be a new interim plan?  

Will all the districts now be subject to change throwing everything into uncertainty?

You can call in at 1-855-463-5009, or via live stream at  <www.aklegislature.tv

  11:30 am

What Do The Election Percentages and Numbers Tell? Maybe Nothing

The Assembly chair has said he will appoint an investigator to review the April 3, 2012 Anchorage Municipal election.  A number of people have gathered data.  None of it proves anything.  But there are lots of anomalies, which taken altogether call out for a thorough investigator to determine whether these anomalies are just coincidences or whether they add up to something seriously wrong with the election.

Elections are important because voting is the fundamental basis of our democracy, which is based on the idea that the public determines our political leaders through elections.  The power comes from the people.  We can argue about whether voters are duped by election propaganda and many other ways elections can go wrong.  But most fundamental is that every person has the right to vote and every vote is counted right.

As I looked at the percentages for the various propositions after the election I was struck by wide margins in each case.  It seemed to me that often school bonds and parks and public transit either lost or won by narrow margins.  But not this year.  So I went back to the Muni website and pulled out the data for several categories of city wide bond propositions.  The data come from the Municipal website.  While I tried to be careful, there is always the possibility of mistakes.

The numbers in the Scribd table show bond elections for the last 6 Anchorage elections. (2012 numbers are from the 4/20 final count.)  All of the bonds for 2012 were at the highest percentage "for" votes in the last six Municipal elections. The school bonds tied 2007 and 2008.  The others were record highs.  Two areas that are most likely to be voted down are public transit and general parks and recreation. (The 2008 vote was for swimming pools and there was a very strong parent backed campaign to pass it.  But when parks and bike trail upgrades are in the ballot, it's likely to barely pass or fail.  Even when it's bundled with emergency medical services as it's been often.)

Why would a surge of conservative voters (there to vote no on Prop. 5) vote in record percentages for bonds that normally win narrowly at best or not at all?  Such voters generally vote to keep property taxes down.  It's an anomaly the investigator should check into. 

A larger percentage of people voted for public transit (in with emergency vehicles) than ever before
Anchorage Prop Vote History 2006-2012

(You can play with the Table above here or go to Scribd and download it.)

I'd note the election data are posted by year and some of the results pages show some Propositions more than once - it appears that they had different numbers of precincts in.  I choose the ones with 100%.  You'll also note that transit is usually packaged with emergency vehicles and it's difficult to figure out it includes public transit funds.

You can see all the past election results here.
Since the results pages are vague, I also checked the sample ballots to see what people were voting for. 


The table below looks at the total vote for the 2012 election,

• for each Muni-wide bond issue and
• each Muni-wide office (mayor and school board members), and 
• compares them to the total votes for or against Prop 5, and 
• then compares them to the total number of voters.

Muni-Wide	Votes	Prop 5 Total	Fewer than Prop 5	Total Vote	Fewer than total
Schools	68,376	70,431	2,055	71,099	2,723
Roads/Drains	69,523	70,431	908	71,099	1,576
Med/Transit	69,890	70,431	741	71,099	1,409
Parks	68,246	70,431	1,185	71,099	1,853
Prop 5	70,431	70,431	0	71,099	668
Mayor	69,655	70,431	776	71,099	1,444
School Seat E	55,226	70,431	15,205	71,099	15,873
School Seat F	53,615	70,431	16,616	71,099	17.484
School Seat G	55,921	70,431	14,510	71,099	15,178

HTML Tables

[UPDATE 8:30: I fixed a typo in the Prop 5 column changing 70451 to 70431.  Fortunately it was correct in the chart I did the calculating so the next column should still be ok.]]

You can see no issue or person on the ballot had more people voting than Prop. 5 (to make it illegal to discriminate against GLBT folks).  The difference ranges from 741 to 2, 055 among the bond propositions and 766  to 16,616  among the candidates running.

Despite the fact that Prop 5 got the most total votes (for or against) there were another 688 people who didn't vote on that proposition.

I don't know what this means, if anything.  It makes sense that Prop 5 attracted more voters than any other issue.  It was the most emotional and the one subject to campaigns for and against. 

I do think that whoever does the investigation ought to look at these figures, probably with the help of a statistician, and determine if they are consistent with past elections. Or if the extra numbers and the high percentages in favor of bond issues Conservatives normally vote against could be the result of tampering with the voting machines.

I would also note that the total number of voters - 71,099 is the highest count going back to 2006.  But it's not something the election planners shouldn't have anticipated.  The 2006 election - also a mayoral race - had 70,859 ballots cast.  That's only 240 fewer ballots than 2012.  If the Deputy Clerk was going to consider more than one previous mayoral race to figure out how many voters to expect, she would have had to have seen this figure.

[UPDATE 9:30 am:  I'm presenting numbers here as objectively as I can.  What they mean is much harder to ascertain.  A good example of this data interpretation problem is in a New York Times article today that looks at attempts to get data to determine the US income gap.  It's  not easy to get clean numbers that reflect what you want to know.  But once you get the numbers it's easy to twist them to make them support your position.  Well, easy if your audience isn't asking hard questions.  In any case, the election numbers are pretty easy to get.  They raise questions that require more investigation.  Are the high percentages for increasing bond indebtedness really high enough to raise eyebrows?  If so, is it just an anomaly or is there something wrong in the vote count?  We can ask similar questions about the overall vote counts for each ballot issue.  Given so many signs from different aspects of the election, the investigation coming up is clearly justified.]

It Worked. I Ran. I Got Smarter.

I finally went out running today.  There were simply no excuses left.  No snow to shovel.  Not meetings to rush off to.  I didn't hike or bike.  And I'd just posted the article on running making you smarter. 

Chester Creek Bike Trail

The bike trail was better than I expected.  They've obviously done some grooming - you can see that snow has been pushed to the sides.


And parts with more sunshine even were bare to the pavement.  But the boggy area to the right which is mostly frozen will be flooding parts of the trail as things thaw.

And some parts of the bog - here right up against the snow berms on the side of the trail - are just water.

Smarter? When I got home I saw that the title for that post was "Running Make You Smarter" so I fixed it. Obviously the running was already working. I know the running does more than the walking or biking because when I run I'm always pushing my pulse up and challenging my lungs to keep me in oxygen. And I sweat. That doesn't happen walking or biking.

"What Did The President Know and When Did He Know It?" Part : Asking The Right QuestionI

Neal Conan's after lunch talk at the Alaska Press Club was about asking the right question.  He gave two well known examples:

• Follow the money
• What did the president know and when did he know it?

I know.  The first isn't a question, but it directs you to ask questions. 

[Do I need to say that Neal Conan is NPR's Talk of the Nation host?]

But his point was that the question depends on the story. And a critical question at one point, may not be relevant to a new story and asking what the president knew about Iraq was the wrong question.   [I'm afraid that somewhere in his talk I got distracted.  Looking at my notes I think I have this,  but I'm not totally sure.  My apologies to Neal if I've misstated this.  The overall point is solid, but take my details with a grain of salt.]

He went on to say his biggest mistake and best story both came from asking the wrong question about Iraq.  As I understood, he was pursuing the story of weapons of mass destruction and whether Iraq had them [his answer was 'no' but Saddam didn't want to say this publicly because he wanted Iran to think he did].  Conan's big story was about a defecting Iraqi scientist who claimed there were secret weapons and had sought asylum with the American military in northern Iraq where Conan was reporting.

The question he said they should have been asking [I think] was, "What was the real reason Bush wanted to go into Iraq?  Conan said he missed this completely, and said it wasn't WMD or even oil. 

[These are my rough notes, cleaned up to make complete words and sentences. I think they capture what he said, but not his exact words.]

What was the real reason?  Why did they want to go to Iraq?  Oil wasn’t the reason.  As long as oil is pumping and getting into the market, it’s ok.  We can get it from somewhere else if ample supply. 

The Bush administration was honest when saying they wanted to establish an honest democracy and drain the swamp. They believed that Al Qaeda recruits from the poor.  If you change the political structures of the Middle East that we were so aligned with for so long, you could dry up Al Qaeda's supply of poor soldiers.  This was a hugely dangerous option.   Why did they think Iraq would change to become like the Netherlands instead of, say, Yugoslavia?  It took Tito to hold the ethnic divisions together.  Afghanistan is similar.  Forces had been unleashed by the Russian war and wouldn’t go back. . . Pashtun people upset all the other groups.  Why did we think Iraq’s ethnic groups held together by Saddam wouldn’t do the same?

. . .  I contributed to problems by not asking the right questions.  Why do we think this place after being held together by Saddam Hussein's . . . rings of spies [wouldn't fall apart into ethnic divisions like Yugoslavia or Afghanistan.]  We think of armies to win wars, but no, [many in the world] are there to hold the regime in power. 

There's a lot to digest after three days of the Alaska Press Club conference and the many thought-provoking speakers and I'm still processing what I heard and how it can help me improve my blogging.  There is no way I can do a full report on the conference.  The best I can do is pick up threads - like this one - and follow them a short way.  This helps me figure things out and lets readers have a peek into what went on.

So last night, reading Doris Kearns Goodwin's No Ordinary Time in bed after hearing Neal Conan,  I got to Franklin Roosevelt's Atlantic 'fishing trip' which turned into a secret meeting at sea with Winston Churchill in August 1941.  Part of the discussion at the "Atlantic Conference" was about the negotiations between the US and Japan.  Which brought to mind, Conan's mention of "What did the president know   . . .?" and the debate WW II buffs have had over whether President Roosevelt knew in advance about the Pearl Harbor attack.

I was going to include that here, but I think this is enough for one post and I'll follow up with another post on that topic. 

Running Makes You Smarter

It was easy to run when we were in LA earlier this year, but with all the snow we had, I switched to shoveling snow as my exercise.  I haven't been a total slug, but I know some serious and regular movement is needed.  The streets are clear of snow and I have no more excuses. 

It sounds like any good exercise will do.   


From Sunday's NYTimes:

For more than a decade, neuroscientists and physiologists have been gathering evidence of the beneficial relationship between exercise and brainpower. But the newest findings make it clear that this isn’t just a relationship; it is the relationship. Using sophisticated technologies to examine the workings of individual neurons — and the makeup of brain matter itself — scientists in just the past few months have discovered that exercise appears to build a brain that resists physical shrinkage and enhance cognitive flexibility. Exercise, the latest neuroscience suggests, does more to bolster thinking than thinking does .(emphasis added.)

Of course every week there is some new food or activity to add or avoid.  But walking and running have been on the good list a long time now.  None of these mean you (specfically) will or won't live longer and get smarter, but it means people in general will, and you might be in the group that does.

[UPDATE:  See follow up post:  It Worked, I Ran I Got Smarter. ]

Blogging Rewards - Connecting With Far Away Reader With a Post

Recent Email:

Hello,

I found your email address on your blog... and I found your blog because I've been searching bird song in Thailand for about two hours and I narrowed my search to trying to order Tony Ball's CD from a company in Holland that won't accept my Thai address and my French bank info... who could blame them. Somewhere in the Tony Ball google search your blog was quoted because you bought volumes one and two -- as it turns out, after actually going out with him as a guide!

I just want volume 1... and it feels like it SHOULD be easy to get since I'm IN Thailand!

I am NOT a birder. . . [She provided some personal information - an American living in Thailand who'd lived in Europe.]

You can't help but notice the birds here -- and I have seen at least one magnificent one that I can't find a picture of on line. But what is driving me crazy is that I am surrounded by their calls all morning and all evening but I can never find the one that's making a distinctive sound -- so I can't match sight and sound.

I don't want to study ALL birds -- I just want to know who's in my neighborhood... and I want to do that by sound.

That seemed simple until I started googling this morning!

Can you please help by sending me contact info for Tony Ball?

(When I go to his site, all that kind of info is in Thai!)

Thanks in advance,

EM

Google makes it possible for EM living in Chiang Mai, Thailand to find me in Anchorage, Alaska to help her get in touch with Tony Ball, back in Chiang Mai.  So I contacted Tony and emailed her back with his email address and a link I made to a post about ten common birds in Chiang Mai. It also let me revisit our wonderful Saturday morning birding with Tony Ball.
I got a second email:  

Greater Racket-Tailed Drongo

Oh I am so SO excited! There he is! Yes, of course Tony Ball is exciting too, but I mean "my" magnificent and heretofore nameless bird is number 2 on your blog list! A Racket-Tailed Drongo! 

And that fat one with the rust-colored wings is a Greater Coucal?

My computer (like me) is old and slow and can't download the latest Flash whatever, so I can't see your video... but because I had the names now, I could go to youtube, and there I found the sound I've been looking for! 

There must be a very large and very lonely Asian Male Koel in the neighborhood because you can hear that mating call on all three "soys".

I love that most of my "mysteries" are already solved AND that I am now able to consult the bird expert directly!

I can't thank you enough!

God willing and the creek don't rise I will be able to "book" Tony for a walk around my neighborhood -- I'll be sure to send you a report on that!

I'll send a separate email to Tony Ball -- I'm really looking forward to meeting him!

Best regards,

Just got an email cc from Tony that she's going to come by and get her CD and they'll plan a birding walk in her neighborhood.   And I love the drongos with those long tails with the feathers at the end.  You can hear them and the koel on the video here.  And it took forever to get that picture of the drongo flying.  Living on the 5th floor surrounded by tree tops helped. 

Judge Rejects Redistricting Board's Amended Proclamation Plan

I'm in a workshop on doing video by Ted Warren from AP.  It's reassuring that at least there is something I'm up to speed on, plus there are good tips for improvement.

But I just checked my email and a reader sent me a copy of the Judge McConahy's order on the Amended Proclamation plan.

Let me get this up now and I'll add more later.   This seems to be the key sentence in the ruling, but I'll have to read more.  I can't cut and paste the pdf I got. 

Essentially, the Board's been told to do a real Hickel process and I suspect the Board is not going to be pleased.  I'm not sure the order is completely realistic - the Board is told to redo Southeast Alaska without consideration of VRA.  My sense is that you have to take both the constitution and VRA into consideration at the same time.


UPDATE:  3:05pm  I'm attaching a copy of the whole order. 120420_Order - Order Remanding Alaska Redistricting Amended Plan Back To Board April 20, 2012