Replies

"Puerto Rico has been given several opportunities to vote themselves into statehood and they've declined. What should be done is we should cut them loose of the government tit."

PR has never had a federally sanctioned referendum on its political status. The local plebiscites that have been held have included either (i) a definition of "commonwealth" that violates the U.S. Constitution and promises everlasting federal subsidies with no chance of federal taxation or (ii) a "None of the Above" column that allowed everyone with a gripe against the governor to vote for nothing in particular. As for unilaterally giving PR its independence, that's like unilaterally giving Massachusetts its independence. Sounds pretty un-American if you ask me, and you'd just have 2 or 3 million U.S. citizens moving to the mainland while the island is ruled by the idiots who stay behind.

"As for the District, it should just be ceded back to Maryland, which would thereby gain one House seat, so they can quit their whining."

That would merely give the Democrats an insurmountable advantage in MD. As for your thought that perhaps the additional House seat for MD would not be Democrat, think again. DC is like 90% Democrat, and it would not have to be kept wholly within one CD. If DC was returned to MD, I think the Democrats would draw a second black-majority CD in Southern Maryland (3rd in the state), taking in quite a bit of the GOP-leaning counties Southeast of PG; white parts of DC would be combined with Montco and parts of Frederick and Howard to comprise 2 heavily Dem white majority CDs. Frankly, it would be a cinch for the Democrats to draw 7 Democrat CDs and only 2 GOP CDs; I think they could even draw 8 Dem CDs and 1 GOP CD in the northern part of the state, but I don't think they'd be smart enough to do it.

I'd much rather make VA safely GOP and MD lean GOP.

As I noted, the math is quirky because DC does not have a large enough population to comprise one CD in a nine-district Maryland apportionment.

First of all, bear in mind that DC is losing population. Its 2000 census population was 572,059 and its 2010 projected population is 529,785. In 2020 DC's population is projected to be 480,540.

Second, it's quite obvious that adding DC to Maryland would mainly add Democrats, but if they are packed into one or two House seats, as they certainly will be, and if they have to pull even more Democrats to round out the seats, as it would seem they certainly will, that leaves the more marginal areas at the borders of the 1st and 6th to comprise a substantial part of a new district.

The reason for the quirk is because the population of Maryland's districts would actually shrink. Based on the 2000 Census and on the 2010 and 2020 projections, here is the population of one Maryland district versus one Maryland + DC district.

2000 Census

Maryland: 5,296,486 in 8 districts of 662,060
MD + DC: 5,868,545 in 9 districts of 652,060

2010 Projection

Maryland: 5,904,970 in 8 districts of 738,121
MD + DC: 6,434,755 in 9 districts of 714,972

2020 Projection

Maryland: 6,497,626 in 7 districts of 928,232
MD + DC: 6,978,166 in 8 districts of 872,270

In 2010, according to the projections, DC will need to pick up 185,187 people from adjoining Maryland territory to round out a district. The heavily GOP MD-01 Eastern Shore district and MD-06 Panhandle district would both need to shrink into even more heavily GOP districts. Regardless of where you get the voters to round out a DC anchored district, or whether you split DC down the middle into two districts, you will still be setting adrift roughly 40,000 mostly conservative voters that would need to get redistributed into the six currently Dem districts.

That may not produce a wash (i.e., trading a heavily Dem district anchored by DC for a third GOP seat elsewhere) but there would be at least 50/50 odds I think. The MD-02 and MD-03 districts already leave fairly little room for error (they were both 45% Bush in 2004) and you simply don't have the leeway to absorb that many conservative precincts out of both MD-01 and MD-06 without creating a toss up seat somewhere.

Great in theory, but about as far from political reality as you can possibly get. What makes you think the Dems in Congress would ever in a million years agree to a plan that would lead to a net loss of Dem electoral votes and Senate seats? Additionally, any change in the boundaries of a state must be approved by the legislature. Assuming Virginia might be persuaded to go along (extremely doubtful) there's no way in hell that Maryland's Democratic legislature would. Finally, the Washingtonians wouldn't want it, because they'd be in a state of 5 million or whatever, where suburbanites would hold all the power.

PS. And note that, if current growth projections hold, then if indeed the 2010 census redistricting gave Maryland (plus DC) seven Dem seats then almost certainly one would be lost in 2020. That's because Maryland would lose a seat at that time, and if current voting patterns also hold, the Eastern Shore district and the Panhandle district would still remain GOP no matter what.

But that's a lot of ifs and we're getting way ahead of ourselves! Let's just leave it at this: The most viable plan to give DC a vote in Congress is to just cede it back to Maryland. At worse that would result in a D pickup of one House seat and nothing more. At best the GOP picks up a seat (if the new DC seat comes at the expense of a Dem seat elsewhere, say in California or New York, and the GOP also picks up a third seat in north-central Maryland). I can live with that!