Hidden election of 2010

[Omar Little]

One of the bigger issues coming up from this election cycle that is not talked about alot in the media, is the timing of this election corresponding with the upcoming census results and redistricting that will occur in the House.

The re-drawing of congressional districts will be done by Governor's and State legislatures and will be in place for the next 10 years. Democrats currently hold the majority of governorships but republicans are looking to take a substantial lead in these positions which will put them in position to have significant influence over the re-drawing of congressional districts to favor republican candidates for the next decade.

[BrainGlutton]

In Florida, at least, we have a game-changer in the works. (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=575770)

I believe California has something similar on the ballot.

[Ravenman]

The OP makes an interesting point, but I'm not sure what the debate is.

[BrainGlutton]

The OP makes an interesting point, but I'm not sure what the debate is.

I think it is, will the Pubs' expected gains of governorships in this midterm translate into lasting gains through control of the state redistricting processes?

[Mr. Moto]

There will be lasting Republican gains anyway. Based on Census projections, at this point Ohio is projected to lose two seats and New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Louisiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota are losing one seat.

Gaining one seat are South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and Washington. Texas is getting an additional 4 seats.

I can only read that as a Republican advance even without gerrymandering.

[Omar Little]

The OP makes an interesting point, but I'm not sure what the debate is.


This isn't in the Great Debates forum....it's in the 2010 U.S. Election fourm. Not everything political is a debate. :rolleyes:

[Ravenman]

Fine. You make an interesting point. Perhaps we should close the thread an make it into a sticky.

[Omar Little]

Fine. You make an interesting point. Perhaps we should close the thread an make it into a sticky.

You don't have to get snarky.

You assumed that the election forum was part of the debate forum. It's not.

We can just as easily have a discussion about the implications of this election on the upcoming redistricting and its impact upon the congressional elections for the next 10 years until the next census.

[Ravenman]

You don't have to get snarky. I'll withdraw my earlier comments, however, I'm not quite sure why a rolleyes wouldn't be considered snark in itself.

[BrainGlutton]

There will be lasting Republican gains anyway. Based on Census projections, at this point Ohio is projected to lose two seats and New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Louisiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota are losing one seat.

Gaining one seat are South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and Washington. Texas is getting an additional 4 seats.

I can only read that as a Republican advance even without gerrymandering.

Nitpick: Florida is a "purple" state -- a new seat here could go either way.

[Richard Parker]

There will be lasting Republican gains anyway. Based on Census projections, at this point Ohio is projected to lose two seats and New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Louisiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota are losing one seat.

Gaining one seat are South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and Washington. Texas is getting an additional 4 seats.

I can only read that as a Republican advance even without gerrymandering.

It depends on the trends driving the change, doesn't it? If those states are getting more seats because of Latino immigration, they're probably also getting bluer.

The nature of the population change is also directly relevant to the gerrymandering. Other than one-person one-vote, the only thing really constraining gerrymandering is the Voting Rights Act and the unconstitutionality of racial gerrymandering. That means partisan gerrymandering is hardest when the population change is a result of immigration, since you risk the appearance of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering.

[Chronos]

There will be lasting Republican gains anyway. Based on Census projections, at this point Ohio is projected to lose two seats and New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Louisiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota are losing one seat.

Gaining one seat are South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and Washington. Texas is getting an additional 4 seats.

I can only read that as a Republican advance even without gerrymandering. Except that a lot of those gains in southern states are from northerners moving to the South, and presumably bringing their political ideas with them. So depending on how things work out, you could end up with Republicans gaining from the immigrants causing the natives' votes to count for more, or you could end up with Democrats gaining from the red states turning purple. This is exactly the sort of thing that redistricting commissions are going to be dealing with, and why it's so relevant who has control of that process in each state.

[C K Dexter Haven]

My son was involved in designing a computer-game that got some NPR coverate, about congressional redistricting. The game involves a hypothetical state, and you have information about the population (e.g., this area is 70% Norwegian ancestry, and tends to vote 65% Republican, or whatever). The first part of the game is to draw the redistricting lines to favor the Democrats; then to favor the Republicans, and finally to try to be fair. It was sort of an eye-opener, how much power lies in drawing those lines.

[Skammer]

This is the one issue that gives me some pause in our gubenatorial election (TN). I usually vote Democrat, but I've been leaning toward the Republican in this race. For one, he just seems more competent, and he's pretty moderate for a Republican. I get a kick out of the tea partiers calling him a "RINO" all the time, which only elevates him in my estimation.

But, I'm a little concerned about the redistricting, especially living in a Democat-controlled district surrounded by Republican-dominated ones. But our statehouse has a Republican majority that is only likely to grow this year, so it probably won't make much of a difference anyway who the governer is.