So, some questions were raised about whether the last diagram, if corrected for population density, might produce different results.
I went out and did some VOLDEMORT-GRADE mucking around to answer a question I already knew the answer to, which is no scatterplot in the social sciences ever gives you a clear answer.
What I did was to correct the population down to 3000 people per square mile, and then figure out what the SFDH rate would be if corrected. Of course, the correction is mostly a mathematical trick, but it does show a few things. Like, Portland has a really, really high SFDH rate compared to its high population density.
if you can pull meaning out of this, you are a victim of the apophenia juice cookie shield