Breaking down the Census news by who controls the redistricting process

The most likely gains or losses in congressional seats occurs in states where there are gains or losses in congressional seats. With respect to the presidential election states that Obama won had a net loss of 6 seats (picking up 4 electoral votes and lost 10 votes). The net pick up for Republicans are 6. Given that Obama won the electoral vote by 365 to 173, this is not a huge change. What really needs to be done here is compare the control of redistricting this year compared to 2000. For example, Republicans controlled the process in Illinois in 2000 but now Democrats control everything so that is one state where Democratic pickups are ripe. By contrast, Republicans controlled Texas both now and for the 2003 redistricting so their pickups for pre-existing seats is fairly limited. Republicans may pick up some seats in California where Democrats have controlled the legislature and governor both times, but now there is an independent commission.

Gains for states that Republicans control legislature and governorship

Gains for states that Democrats control legislature and governorship

Gains for states with divided control

Losses for states that Democrats control legislature and governorship
ILLINOIS -1 (Politico mentions that Democrats think that they can pick up as many as five congressional seats in this states -- GOP Rep.-elect Bobby Schilling and the four incoming House Republicans in the suburban Chicago area)
MASSACHUSETTS -1 (can only be a Democrat loss because Democrats control all of the congressional seats)

Losses for states that Republicans control legislature and governorship

Gains for states with divided control

"Independent" Commission

UPDATE: An official at the NCSL claims:

Tim Storey, an expert on redistricting at the National Conference of State Legislatures, said that Republicans were in their strongest position to draw lines in decades. Of the districts drawn by state legislatures, he said, Republicans have the power to unilaterally draw 196, four times as many as the Democrats. A decade ago, he said, Democrats had the advantage. . . .

Political analysts said that Republicans were poised to add anywhere from a net of 3 to a net of 15 Republican-leaning seats. But they note that the impact can be short-lived.

In times of upheaval, said Michael Barone, who covers redistricting exhaustively as a co-author of “The Almanac of American Politics,” it can be hard to predict how voters in some districts will behave. “When opinion changes,” he said, “it turns out some of those 53-percent districts aren’t yours anymore.”

Labels: ,


Blogger Unknown said...

As far as Illinois goes, the "republicans" here are little more than socialists with an R behind there names, the perfect example is Ray LaHood. Illinois is going to be in a hurting way for a long time due to the spending ways controlled by Chicago-area politicians running the whole state and the rest of the state's rural population living like serfs. When the piper is paid, the bill will likely be so great that it will rival that of California. I've lived in Illinois my whole life and I can foresee the day I'll have to pick up my family and move to a state that doesn't resemble the Soviet Union.

12/21/2010 1:55 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home