Redistricting California (Part 1): U.S. House

Here is my attempt at redistricting California’s U.S. House seats, following the commission’s goal of communities of interest as closely as I could. I included each incumbent’s name in roughly which district they’d end up in as a result of this redistricting. I was just not sure where Jerry Lewis would go, and many of the other SoCal reps were rough estimates.

Here are the numbers I ended up with when I finished. (Something odd I noticed in DRA was that when I colored in one block, blocks miles away were also colored in with that same color, like you can see in CA-16 with the color for CA-14.)

Safe Dem: 26

Likely Dem: 5

Lean Dem: 5

Toss-Up: 5

Lean GOP: 2

Likely GOP: 3

Safe GOP: 7

White-majority: 24

Hispanic-majority: 10

Black-majority: 1

Majority-minority with no one majority race: 18 (including the 2 districts that are 50% white; I wasn’t sure if they were 50.1-50.4% or 49.6-49.9%)

Here are the maps and descriptions of each district.

Outer NorCal

Photobucket

CA-01: North Coast + most of Solano County (Mike Thompson (D))

Demographics: 68% White, 17% Hispanic, 5% Black

2008 President: Obama 62%, McCain 36% (SAFE DEM: D+9)

CA-02: Northern Mountain south to Nevada County (Wally Herger)

Demographics: 82% White, 9% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 53%, Obama 44% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

CA-03: Sacramento Valley and part of Sacramento County; similar to 1990s configuration (Dan Lungren)

Demographics: 68% White, 18% Hispanic, 7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 51%, McCain 47% (TOSS-UP: R+2)

CA-04: Lake Tahoe and Sacramento suburbs in Placer and El Dorado Counties (Tom McClintock)

Demographics: 82% White, 10% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 54%, Obama 44% (SAFE GOP: R+8)

CA-05: Sacramento (Doris Matsui)

Demographics: 50% White, 19% Hispanic, 13% Asian, 12% Black

2008 President: Obama 67%, McCain 31% (SAFE DEM: D+14)

San Francisco Bay Area

Photobucket

CA-06: Marin and Sonoma Counties (Lynn Woolsey)

Demographics: 76% White, 15% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 76%, McCain 22% (SAFE DEM: D+23)

CA-07: Southwestern Solano County, western Contra Costa County except Richmond (George Miller)

Demographics: 58% White, 14% Asian, 13% Hispanic, 10% Black

2008 President: Obama 70%, McCain 28% (SAFE DEM: D+17)

CA-08: San Francisco (Nancy Pelosi)

Demographics: 44% White, 29% Asian, 15% Hispanic, 8% Black

2008 President: Obama 85%, McCain 13% (SAFE DEM: D+32)

CA-09: Richmond, Berkeley, Oakland (Barbara Lee)

Demographics: 33% White, 26% Black, 20% Hispanic, 17% Asian

2008 President: Obama 89%, McCain 9% (SAFE DEM: D+36)

CA-10: Most of Sacramento County, northern/eastern San Joaquin County (John Garamendi)

Demographics: 59% White, 19% Hispanic, 11% Asian, 6% Black

2008 President: Obama 51%, McCain 47% (TOSS-UP: R+2)

CA-11: Eastern Contra Costa County, western San Joaquin County (Open)

Demographics: 52% White, 24% Hispanic, 11% Asian, 7% Black

2008 President: Obama 62%, McCain 37% (SAFE DEM: D+9)

CA-12: Northern San Mateo County, southwestern San Francisco (Jackie Speier)

Demographics: 47% White, 28% Asian, 18% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 74%, McCainn 24% (SAFE DEM: D+21)

CA-13: Western Alameda County; I had to expand to Pleasanton to maintain enough population (Jerry McNerney and Pete Stark)

Demographics: 38% White, 26% Asian, 22% Hispanic, 8% Black

2008 President: Obama 74%, McCainn 24% (SAFE DEM: D+21)

CA-14: Silicon Valley (Southern San Mateo County, western Santa Clara County) (Anna Eshoo)

Demographics: 57% White, 22% Asian, 15% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 72%, McCain 26% (SAFE DEM; D+19)

CA-15: San Jose (probably Mike Honda)

Demographics: 55% White, 28% Asian, 21% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 70%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM; D+17)

CA-16: Eastern Alameda and Santa Clara Counties (probably Zoe Lofgren)

Demographics: 37% White, 28% Asian, 28% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 65%, McCain 34% (SAFE DEM; D+12)

Central

Photobucket

CA-17: Northern Central Coast except with a little bit of Santa Clara added and the southern half of Monterey removed (Sam Farr)

Demographics: 53% White, 36% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 72%, McCain 26% (SAFE DEM; D+19)

CA-18: Stretching from Stockton in San Joaquin all the way to Kings County and part of Tulare County to get enough population (Dennis Cardoza)

Demographics: 53% Hispanic, 34% White, 5% Black, 5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 50%, McCain 48% (LEAN GOP; R+3)

CA-19: Parts of Stanislaus, Merced, and Madera Counties, all of Mariposa County (Jeff Denham)

Demographics: 56% White, 32% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: McCain 50%, Obama 49% (LEAN GOP; R+4)

CA-20: Fresno proper (Jim Costa)

Demographics: 43% White, 36% Hispanic, 10% Asian, 6% Black

2008 President: Obama 51%, McCain 47% (TOSS-UP; R+2)

CA-21: Most of Tulare and Kern Counties (Devin Nunes)

Demographics: 46% White, 45% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 59%, Obama 40% (SAFE GOP: R+13)

CA-22: Bakersfield and Lancaster (Kevin McCarthy)

Demographics: 51% White, 34% Hispanic, 8% Black

2008 President: McCain 55%, Obama 43% (SAFE GOP: R+9)

CA-23: Southern half of Monterey, all of SLO and SB, far southwestern Ventura (Lois Capps)

Demographics: 63% White, 29% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 57%, McCain 41% (LEAN DEM: D+4)

CA-24: Most of Ventura County (Elton Gallegly)

Demographics: 54% White, 35% Hispanic, 6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 56%, McCain 42% (LEAN DEM: D+3)

CA-25: Northern half of L.A. County plus a little bit of San Bernardino County (Buck McKeon)

Demographics: 53% White, 28% Hispanic, 9% Asian, 6% Black

2008 President: Obama 54%, McCain 44% (TOSS-UP: D+1)

Los Angeles/Orange County/Inland Empire

Photobucket

CA-26: West Side L.A. plus Thousand Oaks in Ventura County (Henry Waxman)

Demographics: 73% White, 13% Hispanic, 7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 67%, McCain 31% (SAFE DEM: D+14)

CA-27: San Fernando (Howard Berman)

Demographics: 64% Hispanic, 20% White, 7% Asian, 5% Black

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 24% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

CA-28: Northern L.A. suburbs including Glendale, Pasadena, and Monrovia (Brad Sherman)

Demographics: 44% White, 30% Hispanic, 14% Asian, 7% Black

2008 President: Obama 65%, McCain 32% (SAFE DEM: D+12)

CA-29: Eastern L.A. County including Pomona, Glendora, Baldwin Park (David Dreier)

Demographics: 52% Hispanic, 29% White, 11% Asian, 5% Black

2008 President: Obama 61%, McCain 37% (SAFE DEM: D+8)

CA-30: Downtown L.A. (probably Xavier Becerra)

Demographics: 53% Hispanic, 21% White, 14% Asian, 10% Black

2008 President: Obama 80%, McCain 18% (SAFE DEM: D+27)

CA-31: Burbank, South Pasadena, part of Downtown (Adam Schiff)

Demographics: 54% Hispanic, 23% White, 16% Asian

2008 President: Obama 77%, McCain 21% (SAFE DEM: D+24)

CA-32: Southeast L.A. County including Monterey Park, El Monte, and Diamond Bar (Judy Chu and Gary Miller)

Demographics: 40% Hispanic, 38% Asian, 17% White

2008 President: Obama 61%, McCain 37% (SAFE DEM: D+8)

CA-33: Santa Monica to El Segundo along the coast (Open; vacated by Jane Harman)

Demographics: 46% White, 29% Hispanic, 11% Black, 9% Asian

2008 President: Obama 76%, McCain 22% (SAFE DEM: D+23)

CA-34: South Central L.A. (Karen Bass and Maxine Waters)

Demographics: 51% Black, 42% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 94%, McCain 5% (SAFE DEM: D+41)

CA-35: The Hispanic side of South Central (Lucille Roybal-Allard)

Demographics: 86% Hispanic, 10% Black

2008 President: Obama 86%, McCain 12% (SAFE DEM: D+33)

CA-36: Norwalk, Montebello, Downey (Grace Napolitano)

Demographics: 63% Hispanic, 22% White, 8% Asian

2008 President: Obama 64%, McCain 34% (SAFE DEM: D+11)

CA-37: Beach Cities, Carson, Palos Verdes Peninsula (Laura Richardson)

Demographics: 38% White, 33% Hispanic, 19% Asian, 6% Black

2008 President: Obama 59%, McCain 39% (LIKELY DEM: D+6)

CA-38: Long Beach (Linda Sanchez)

Demographics: 36% Hispanic, 32% White, 16% Asian, 13% Black

2008 President: Obama 66%, McCain 32% (SAFE DEM: D+13)

CA-39: Southwestern San Bernardino County including Fontana, Ontario, and Chino (Joe Baca)

Demographics: 52% Hispanic, 30% White, 8% Black, 7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 59%, McCain 39% (LIKELY DEM: D+6)

CA-40: Rialto, San Bernardino, Redlands, Calimesa (Jerry Lewis?)

Demographics: 41% Hispanic, 38% White, 12% Black, 5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 57%, McCain 41% (LEAN DEM: D+4)

CA-42: Around the city of Riverside; includes Norco and Moreno Valley (Open)

Demographics: 45% Hispanic, 36% White, 10% Black, 5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 60%, McCain 39% (LIKELY DEM: D+7)

CA-43: Riverside city and some of southwest Riverside County (Ken Calvert)

Demographics: 66% White, 22% Hispanic, 5% Black

2008 President: McCain 54%, Obama 45% (SAFE GOP: R+8)

CA-45: Most of coastal Orange County (Dana Rohrabacher)

Demographics: 72% White, 13% Hispanic, 11% Asian

2008 President: McCain 52%, Obama 46% (LIKELY GOP; R+6)

CA-46: North-central Orange County including Anaheim, Buena Park, and Garden Grove (Ed Royce)

Demographics: 44% Hispanic, 28% White, 22% Asian

2008 President: Obama 52%, McCain 46% (TOSS-UP; R+1)

CA-47: Central Orange County including Santa Ana, Irvine, and Orange (Loretta Sanchez)

Demographics: 51% Hispanic, 31% White, 13% Asian

2008 President: Obama 59%, McCain 39% (LIKELY DEM; D+6)

CA-48: Northeastern and most of Southern Orange County (probably John Campbell)

Demographics: 67% White, 17% Hispanic, 12% Asian

2008 President: McCain 55%, Obama 43% (SAFE GOP; R+9)

Outer SoCal

Photobucket

CA-41: All of Inyo County and most of San Bernardino County (Jerry Lewis?)

Demographics: 63% White, 23% Hispanic, 6% Black

2008 President: McCain 55%, Obama 43% (SAFE GOP: R+9)

CA-44: Most of Riverside County and all of Imperial County (Mary Bono Mack)

Demographics: 53% Hispanic, 40% White

2008 President: Obama 56%, McCain 43% (LEAN DEM; D+3)

CA-49: Far southern Orange County, southwestern Riverside County, northwestern San Diego County including Camp Pendleton (Darrell Issa)

Demographics: 61% White, 26% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: McCain 53%, Obama 45% (LIKELY GOP; R+7)

San Diego

Photobucket

CA-50: Most of coastal San Diego County (Brian Bilbray)

Demographics: 73% White, 15% Hispanic, 6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 58%, McCain 40% (LEAN DEM; D+5)

CA-51: Northern San Diego, Lemon Grove (Susan Davis)

Demographics: 50% White, 18% Hispanic, 18% Asian, 10% Black

2008 President: Obama 60%, McCain 39% (LIKELY DEM: D+7)

CA-52: Most of inland San Diego County (Duncan Hunter)

Demographics: 68% White, 22% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 58%, Obama 40% (SAFE GOP; R+12)

CA-53: Southern San Diego, Chula Vista, Imperial Beach (Bob Filner)

Demographics: 48% Hispanic, 29% White, 11% Asian, 8% Black

2008 President: Obama 61%, McCain 37% (SAFE DEM: D+8)

Part 2 of my redistricting California series, the State Senate, will come in a few days.

48 thoughts on “Redistricting California (Part 1): U.S. House”

  1. I would like to see that version of CA-3, it would make for some interesting elections.

    The Central Valley will have to turn out different. I imagine one Hispanic district will be required, one that meets voting age population. The Bakersfield-Lancaster district would be problematic, because Lancaster and Palmdale should be in one district and neither have much in common with Bakersfield. Other than that, everything else looks good on this map.

  2. I’m pretty sure thus would violate the VRA.  For example, I think what you did in the Central Valley would be problematic.  Even though there is a Hispanic majority district, with an R+3 lean, they probably wouldn’t be able to elect a candidate of choice.

    Also, this map has only 10 Hispanic-majority districts, the same number as the current map, despite the large growth in Hispanic population over the past decade.  So, I think the panel will make at least a few more.

  3. I’m very close to posting another California map myself. Now you’ve given me an excuse to hold off at least a few days, so thanks!

    Seriously though, I know how much work goes into making a California map, but it seems to me that there are a few potential problems with your mapping scheme that I feel the need to bring up.

    1) Whatever your starting point, both CA-01 and CA-03 bypass nearby population centers in order to reach more distant populations for no apparent reason. This is expressly prohibited by the new guidelines. You can easily draw them to be far more compact.

    2) Merced County is split between CA-18 and CA-19; Monterey County is split between CA-17 and CA-23. These are Section 5 preclearance counties and you’ve placed at least half of the Latino population in majority white districts. At best, that would be very dicey from a “retrogression” standpoint. Kings County is also a Section 5 preclearance county and it has gone from a 60%+ Latino district to a 53% Latino district.

    3) What is the rationale for that weird CA-22 district? It is not a majority-minority district, so it cannot be justified under VRA guidelines, yet it doesn’t appear to follow any traditional redistricting principles. Moreover, it seems to create a nearly-as-weird CA-25 district for no apparent reason.

    4) I don’t have a huge objection to your decision to go Imperial to Riverside vs Imperial to San Diego. However, if you do make that decision then there’s no doubt that your CA-53 district could be closer to 60% Latino rather than 48% Latino. Now, I realize that the ‘special data’ map understates Latino population, but I can tell just by glancing at your CA-53 district that you are taking in heavily white coastal areas south of San Diego while excluding heavily Latino areas in east central San Diego. Especially since you have no preserved the San Diego city limits anyhow, I don’t see how that’d fly.

    I guess those are the big ones. I also wonder about the odds shape of CA-42 and the CA-25 dip into the San Fernando Valley, but I can see some rationale for why one might make those moves (though I personally don’t find them persuasive).

    Anyhow, sorry to be so critical, but that’s the whole point of posting, right? There can never be enough California redistricting talk so far as I’m concerned!

  4.  I like how you were able to carve out a few more Democratic districts and I like how you handled LA county. It is a pretty hard shell to crack there.

    A few quibbles: I am not a big fan of the 20th not following the VRA strictly enough. Also, I am not a big fan of connecting Livermore with the 16th district. I think that belongs in the 13th or the 11th district. I also think that although there is now an African American majority seat, the VRA will not be happy because 2 of the 3 LA African American representatives could be primaried out.  

  5. old ground in CA. I see many of the same numerous problems that existed in previous CA maps.

    1. There are two many urban-rural hybrid districts.  For some reason democratic mapmakers here love to attach democratic urban & surburban areas to republican rural areas.  The rational is always the same which is its just logical to do it that way or community of interest or something.  

    2. Every twist and turn in this map, all very logical, favors the democrats.  I don’t see a turn east or west or north or south that benefits the GOP. For whatever reason every community of interest move here favors the democrats.  The moves in this map favor the democrats in such an odd way that its like flipping a coin and coming up heads 17 times in a row.  

    3. I don’t want to another VRA discussion.  I will just say that this map have major retrogression issues.  CA has a doubling of hispanic population from 2000 to 2010 and this map appears to have lowered the number of hispanic seats with the 60% treshold.  This map does a very nifty job of dividing hispanics up to help elect white democrats.  Somehow I think either the DOJ or redistricting commission would object to it.

    That being said thanks for posting this map.  Its an huge job to do it.  I very well may do a CA map after all the census data comes in.  

  6. The map looks nice. I think some incumbent would find surprises.

    Majority-minority with no one majority race: 18 (including the 2 districts that are 50% white; I wasn’t sure if they were 50.1-50.4% or 49.6-49.9%)

    For know the exact percentage you need only divide the white population by the total population of the district (and multiply by 100 if you wish). The application give the necessary data.

  7. list of seats in this map that,  in my opinion,  are either partisan gerrymander ruls  or severe violations of the community interest/protect incumbent rules that the nonpartisan commission should  abide by.

    #1 district #3.  Its the classic lets attach the northern part of the city of Sacramento to the rural area in the foothills of Sierra Nevada.  That’s a nifty 100 northward connecting urban areas to various towns of 200 people each.  Why does this seat make sense?  Wait a minute it attaches a strong pool of democrats in an urban area to conservative rural areas.  Check that puppy off the list.

    2. The solution is district #3 is to have two seats totally in Sacremento county.  Why not?  This leads to gerrymandered seat #2.  Your seat #10 attaches surburban Sacramento county to rural San Jaoquin county.  Yup lets connect republican parts of two counties that do not have anything in common with eachother except a common border.  One is suburban and on is agricultural.  Slice and dice time.

    3. Next up is #11. I have seen several maps here and without fail there must be a seat that combines Contra Costa or Alameda county with San Jaoquin.  There must be some sort program flaw in Dave’s app because every map on this site wants to connect the Bay area to rural San Jaoquin county.  Why now?  Why not keep the Bay area to itself instead of attaching urban areas to rural areas?

    4. The answer to #3, of course, is Monterey county.  Say what?  If you do not attach district #11 to San Jaoquin county it starts a chain reaction in the bay area.  Sam Farr has to take in nearly all of Monterey county if you don attach San Benito county to his seat and attach some of San Jaoquin to a Bay area seat.  So #17 & #23 are the gerrymandered seats of Monterey county.  You have to split Monterery county to give Capps a safe D seat.  Try to do it without it?

    5. The next seat on my list of gerrymandered seats is #24. Its the next seat down the coast from Capps seat.  Because of the splitting of Monterey county.  The Ventura based #24 must give up some of its population to LA county.  Naturally every map here has a West LA county taking the most GOP part of Ventura county.  Naturally why not?  well the butterfly that flaps its wings in West LA is the San Jaoquin lunge.  It sets in a motion a nifty division of Monterey and the attaching of the most GOP part of Ventura to a super safe D seat in LA county.  

    6. Lets stay in west LA for seat #25. This seat is in the far western part of San Fernando Valley & has nearly all of the North county of LA plus part of SB county.  Can you say gerrmander or lack of community of interest?  I am not a betting man but I would take a bet that seat will not exist in 2012.

    Well I am losing steam and this post is already too long.  I need to items on the Central valley and the suburban LA counties but that will have to wait for another day.  Don’t take this post personal.  Its not a attack on your map making skills but rather pointing out decisions that you make are political and have one sided political benefits.  

Comments are closed.