Posted on 11/04/2010 7:57:42 PM PDT by scrabblehack
I don't know if others find this as interesting as I do but let's see. On another thread there was some discussion about whether PA-12 (Critz, Murtha's successor) would be eliminated in 2012. If the estimates at census.gov are any good, let's suggest some mapping strategies for any number of states. I'm guessing there won't be enough interest to break this into state-by-state threads.
The Dallas-area seat looks Republican - only Dallas County voted for White over Perry, and that is the county with the lowest growth.
The Houston-area seat: Harris County did vote for White by a small margin (he was mayor of Houston, no?), the other counties voted Republican. However after you take out the 9th, 18th and the 29th (assuming high correlation between Gov-vote and U.S. Rep.-vote, a safe assumption), then Perry must have won the remainder of Harris County. The three Democrat districts do not appear to be where the growth was....indeed unless a lot of Democrat voters in the 29th stayed home, Gene Green could be in trouble next time out.
The 2nd and 7th were uncontested races - hard to check vote totals there.
Austin/San Antonio: White did carry Bexar and Travis, with Perry carrying Williamson and the two connector counties.
However when you subtract out the 20th district then Perry won the remainder. Again that appears to be where the growth is. In the 25th, Doggett lost every county except Travis.
So yes, I like the GOP’s chances for all 3 seats.
There has to be some bad news too...Dems control the process in IL, although Cook County has lost nearly a full seat. However there is enough of a core to protect all 7 Democrat seats in Chicagoland. The 8th could be eliminated, and the 10th may get some new Democrats.
I don’t think this is going to be easily doable. Obama’s justice department will ask for 1 VRA majority hispanic district.
The 12th will likely disappear, and feed territory to the neighboring Dem districts.
That means yielding the 9th, but that’s fine. 9-5 is a fair lead in a state like Michigan.
We have an 11-8 advantage currently in Illinois. Unfortunately Bill Brady’s loss means that flips to something like 6-12.
There’s just too much blue voters in Chicago to spread out.
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/3761/northcarolina.gif
http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/3282/northcarolina2ndtry.gif
North Carolina.
Goes from 7 Democrats to either 4 or 5, depending on if Shuler can be beaten.
Each R district is 55+ McCain %.
Nevada - this is an easy one. Most of the growth has been in suburban Las Vegas (the current 3rd). However Clark County will likely not be big enough to house a 3rd seat by itself. So it looks to me there like:
1 - Las Vegas & vicinity
2 - Carson City & vicinity (a large vicinity to be sure)
3 - suburban Las Vegas
4 - exurban Las Vegas (including, and dominated by, a big chunk of Clark County).
The (Democrat) legislature will have a great deal of choice on how to divvy up the rural counties of Nevada (among what I have called the 2nd and 4th) but the new district will be dominated by Clark County. There will be a Republican governor.
The current 3rd was barely won by a Republican. So the best Republicans can hope for is 1 safe Dem seat, 2 safe R seats, and a tossup. The worst (and more likely) scenario is 2 safe Dem seats and 2 safe R seats.
There’s a couple of NY state senate seats up in the air, and that could be the difference between a Democrat railroad and a legislative compromise.
The lost seat will be upstate. The 17th will extend further into Rockland and beyond, but it appears there’s enough of a core there to keep the seat Democrat.
The 27th and 28th are surrounded by Republicans but again there’s enough of a core there to keep those two Democrat. But the population loss in the 28th will shift the renumbered 29th east, putting the squeeze on the 24th. Possibly Hanna could challenge Owens, or the 24th would put the squeeze on the 20th. Possibly Hayworth or Gibson might end up challenging Hinchey.
The 25th could get some Republican areas taken away and some
Democrat areas added.
Not sure if the 1st could get any more Democrat or not....probably not enough to make it unwinnable.
Worst case looks like 2 seats lost for the GOP, 1 gained for Dems.
Where do you suppose such a seat would be?
What is wrong with this picture?
Congress plays this little game every ten years and one state or another always loses. Doesn't anyone think it's time to open the so-called People's House to real representation?
No Taxation Without REAL Representation!
Some strip from Houston to the Rio Grande, parallel to the other strips.
For what it’s worth when it comes to redistricting don’t forget there are nine states that must get approval from the Feds for their CDs because of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Some other states have a portion of the state that must be approved [CA and NY] come to mind.
The good news is the the GOP will have a free hand to do what they want in Ohio.
I thought the population loss was in Western Massachusetts but anecdotally, our many little s*!thole cities (New Bedford, Fall River, Brockton, Lynn, Lawrence, etc.) also seem to be in decline population wise. Also, in Pennsylvania, can’t the GOP focus in on the bad areas in Philly and Pitt to construct a few 70% Left areas, leaving the rest of Pennsylvania for the GOP?
For those of us who do not live in NY, could you link the locations of the districts to the names of cities so we can relate your post to something concrete! Fo instance, where is Albany in this scenario? Saratoga Springs? Binghampton? Clifton Park? Thanks.
If you pull up that USCB link, the Census 2000 pop. for MA was 6349097, making a seat in MA equal to roughly 634910 constituents.
The 2009 estimate (yes, it’s just an estimate), is 6593587, making a seat in MA equal to roughly 732621 constituents.
If their county-by-county estimates are right, then Middlesex has lost 0.25 seats, Essex 0.13, Norfolk 0.11, Bristol 0.09.
I figure the 4th, 9th, and 10th become 2 seats.
I suppose that would leave Farenthold without a seat? It might be possible to carve out something from Corpus Christi to Austin, leaving Doggett without a seat.
No, he’ll still have a seat, just one he is unlikely to win in the long term.
You can, yeah.
The problem is right now there’s only 3 Dems in Philadelphia area territory, and there’s a lot of leftist population there. Too much to swallow with just 3 Dems.
The way I see it...1-16 metro NYC...districts stay roughly as is.
17 - Bronx-Westchester-Rockland...This one will need to spread further north. (D)
18 - Westchester - as is. (D)
19 - lower Hudson (R) - since the 17th has to go north, this one continues the ripple. If Dems control the process it will go into the 20th; if it’s a compromise it might get some of the 22nd.
20 - exurban Albany (R), including Saratoga.
21 - metro Albany (D)
22 - currently stretches from the lower Hudson to Cornell
through Binghamton (D) -
23 - big district upstate (D)
24 - Utica to the finger lakes (R). If eliminated incumbent could possibly run in the 23rd.
25 - metro Syracuse (R) - could become Democrat if it took in Cornell (at the risk of losing the 22nd). If it shifts east instead of south, it’s more Republican but then it obliterates the 24th.
26 - eastern suburbs and exurbs of Buffalo (R). This is the most Republican district in the state.
27 - Buffalo and points southwest (D)
28 - Niagara Falls to Rochester (D) - has lost population;
Slaughter wins comfortably so she could take in extra territory anywhere; she might prefer it to the east.
29 - Southwestern Tier (excluding Chatauqua) to the finger lakes. This one will have to shift east one way or another.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
