Congressional reapportionment numbers are in

Not nearly as bad as it could have been for the Democrats:

TX gets two new seats
FL, OR, CO, MT, NC get one new seat

NY, IL, CA, WV, MI, OH, PA lose one seat each.

NY only losing one seat is amazing. Arizona didn’t get a new seat is also a surprise. I’ve already seen right wing media gloating over CA losing a seat.

For Republicans, they get only 3 new seats in FL/TX to gerrymander, they’ve got complete control in both states.

The House could go either way in the 2022 midterms, there’s likely to be a lot of retirements anyway as the Dems have a very old caucus. I assume they’ll be some interesting battlegrounds when the new districts are drawn. With NY only losing one seat (some estimates had as many as 3) there won’t be a primary battle with any of the incumbent progressives.

There’s looking at this from an Electoral College point of view, but also a Congressional.

My ill-informed guess on impact to the House:
TX: +1 R, +1 D
FL: +1 R
OR: +1 D
CO: +1 D
MT: +1 R
NC: +1 tossup
NY: -1 R
IL: -1 tossup
CA: -1 R
WV: -1 R
MI: -1 D
OH: -1 R
PA: -1 tossup

For totals of +3 R, +3 D, +1 ?, -4 R, -1 D, -2 ?, with a delta of -1 R, +2 D, -1 ?.

That seems overly optimistic for the Democrats, but I’d be happy if it turned out that way.

ETA: My guess is that just like in the EC, the big redistricting fights will be in the “blue wall” states of MI, PA, and WI. Democratic governors and Republican legislatures in those three states, which are already highly gerrymandered, will make for the most interesting redistricting fights.

I think the biggest fight will be in TX to see how badly they can gerrymander. Of course, a district that looks R today can look a lot different down the line a few years. Especially if it elects a 100% unapologetic Trumper who can’t possible pass for a moderate

It probably is optimistic. I thinking about the rural-urban divide. States tend to lose people from their rural areas, and gain people in their urban areas. So the “default” is that states lose R seats and gain D seats. Of course, each state has its own demographics and I’m making bold guesses to that.

Michigan might not be as interesting as we enacted, in 2018, a ballot proposal for an independent commission to draw the lines.

There’s simply no way that Texas Republicans (who have the Governor’s office and both chamber of the Legislature) let one of the new seats go to the Democrats – at least not intentionally. Also in North Carolina, the (Democratic) Governor does not have veto power over maps passed by the (Republican) Legislature, so that seat’s going to go R.

But still a better position for Ds to be in than many feared.

Illinois loses 18,000 residents out of 12.8 million (14/100s of a percent!) in a decade and it loses one out of 18 congressional seats when the average population represented by a congressperson is over 700,000?! :face_with_raised_eyebrow: We had 12.8 million in the 2010 census, and we still have 12.8 million in the 2020 census, we didn’t drop to 12.1 million or something. WTF?!

It’s a crazy formula they use to determine it. NY lost a seat because of 89 people? And had they kept that seat, the seat loss would be Minnesota. Weird math

And Minnesota kept a seat by 26 people!

The total population didn’t stay static. We dropped from 4.2% to 3.8% of the total population.

No matter how you calculate the congressional seats, there are guaranteed to always be some scenarios that result in weird results. I’m pretty sure that’s been mathematically proven. Believe it or not, what we have now is about the least bad formula possible (at least, unless you allow weird things like fractional representatives whose votes count less).

“Live by the gerrymander, die by the gerrymander.”

The Republicans are going to get slaughtered in upcoming elections as they run more and more Marjorie-Taylor-Green-like candidates. We could be looking at a 250-seat Democratic House majority at some point this upcoming decade.

These kinds of predictions are just nuts. I’ll be ecstatic if it’s true, but Trump just pulled ten million extra voters out of his ass a few months ago, and Biden had to obliterate records for turnout to beat him in a close election.

Even Nate Silver doesn’t make predictions this early. Might as well flip a coin.

Boy, I’m now glad I put in those hours ass a Census Enumerator in Minneapolis, Minnesota!

Though back when it finished, I was quite disillusioned with it. The process was so badly designed & run – it almost seemed like management was intentionally trying to mess it up. And maybe they were, looking at who Trump put in charge.

The raw population gain or loss is just part of the equation. Some way, some how, the national total MUST equal 435. It’s a zero-sum game. So if one state gains 500k people, and gets another seat, some other state is going to have to lose a seat.

Thank you for your service!!!

I just looked at the MI congressional delegation. It’s 14 seats, divided evenly. That sounds fair given the presidential votes the last two elections, but Democrats look like they’re in greater danger of losing seats than Republicans. In particular, Democrats hold the following seats with the following partisan lean. 5th district D +1, 8th district R +4, 9th district D+4, and 11th district R +2. The closest Republican seat is R +5. Democrats have two seats that are D +30 in Detroit.

Looking at the map, the 9th and 11th both look gerrymandered, with areas that wrap over, across, and back around. I haven’t looked at there history yet, but I’m betting those two districts have been held by Republicans recently, and that they were probably gerrymandered to elect Republicans. Let’s test this hypothesis.

The 11th was as Republican gain in 2012 and a hold in 2014 and 2016, which fits with the hypothesis that the Rs gerrymandered it.

The 9th looks like it’s been safely D for a while, so I was wrong about that one.

Either way, it looks like that commission has some funky shaped districts to clean up. Let’s hope they do there job.

The 14 is seriously gerrymandered, but by Republicans to elect a Dem overwhelmingly. Brenda L. Lawrence - District Map | | Library of Congress

In 2018 Brenda Lawrence got 81%.

Right. That’s what I gathered in my cursory glance at the map. They stuffed all the blue voters into the 13th and 14th so the Rs could have a better chance in the 9th and 11th. I obviously haven’t looked at precinct by precinct numbers, but I’m guessing a more regular shape would have resulted in the 9th and 11th being more safely blue.