Population Change by CD and by County

With the Census Bureau having completed its gradual rollout of data from all the states last week, I’ve finally gotten around to assembling data from all the various congressional districts into one place. While the actual population gain or loss in each district isn’t as important a number, for SSP purposes, as the number of people each district will need to shed or gain as part of the redistricting process (which you can see in the various posts we did as each state’s data came out), the overall gain and loss is an important part in the overall picture of where people are moving to and from (and where they’re being born). Just the numbers of people moving in or out isn’t as helpful as knowing who exactly these people are, and we’ll delve a little more deeply into the changing racial compositions of the CDs in the next day or two… but for now, here are the overall population change numbers.

You’re probably noticing, “Wow, that’s a lot of Republican districts.” That’s certainly true, but these are also districts that (as we’ll see when we talk about changing racial composition), for the most part, aren’t becoming more Republican; people tend to bring their values with them rather than undergoing some magical David Brooksian conversion experience once they move in from the city, the inner-ring suburbs, or another country. Some of these districts are ones where much of the gains are Hispanic (like NV-03 or TX-10, or just about any California district on the list); in the case of GA-07, it’s becoming more African-American. That isn’t to say that these are all on the verge of becoming blue, of course; with much of these districts’ non-white populations under 18, it’ll be a gradual process. And redistricting is likely to de-diversify at least some of these districts, with some of the closer-in suburban portions of these districts (note that many of these districts are the ones right on the cusp of suburb and exurb) to be given to lower-population urban districts that need to expand outward, with the remaining parts of the districts staying red. (GA-07, again, is a case in point; the innermost parts of Gwinnett County, which are pretty diverse today, probably will need to get added on to underpopulated GA-05, leaving the rest of the district in very Republican-friendly condition.)

You may recall I did this same thing a year and a half ago when the 2008 estimates came out; there’s been very little change to the list since then, although with some swapping of places. Despite its position at the absolute epicenter of the housing bubble, NV-03 moved up from 4th to 1st place, past the two Arizona districts and TX-10. Districts that fell out of the top 25 in 2008 include GA-06, TX-03, CO-06, FL-25, IL-14, and FL-06, replaced by VA-10, FL-12, TX-28, TX-23, TX-04, and ID-01.

District Rep. 2000 2010 Change
NV-03 Heck (R) 665,345 1,043,855 378,510
AZ-02 Franks (R) 641,435 972,839 331,404
AZ-06 Flake (R) 641,360 971,733 330,373
TX-10 McCaul (R) 651,523 981,367 329,844
FL-05 Nugent (R) 639,719 929,533 289,814
CA-45 Bono Mack (R) 638,553 914,209 275,656
GA-07 Woodall (R) 630,511 903,191 272,680
TX-26 Burgess (R) 651,858 915,137 263,279
TX-22 Olson (R) 651,657 910,877 259,220
TX-31 Carter (R) 651,868 902,101 250,233
NC-09 Myrick (R) 619,705 852,377 232,672
VA-10 Wolf (R) 643,714 869,437 225,723
UT-03 Chaffetz (R) 744,545 966,232 221,687
FL-14 Mack (R) 639,298 858,956 219,658
AZ-07 Grijalva (D) 640,996 855,769 214,773
NC-04 Price (D) 619,432 826,878 207,446
CA-44 Calvert (R) 639,008 844,756 205,748
CA-25 McKeon (R) 638,768 844,320 205,552
TX-21 Smith (R) 651,930 856,954 205,024
FL-12 Ross (R) 640,096 842,199 202,103
TX-28 Cuellar (D) 651,259 851,824 200,565
TX-23 Canseco (R) 651,149 847,651 196,502
TX-04 Hall (R) 651,500 846,142 194,642
GA-09 Graves (R) 629,678 823,583 193,905
ID-01 Labrador (R) 648,922 841,930 193,008

And here are the biggest losers, looking every bit as heavily Democratic as the list of gainers is Republican. However, if you go through the list line by line, you’ll notice that very few of these districts are even remotely-considered as being on the chopping block. That’s partly because many of these are VRA seats, or otherwise set up by Republican legislatures as Democratic vote sinks (PA-14, for example). The most obvious exceptions up for elimination are PA-12, which almost everyone concedes is gone with the wind, OH-10, which is set to get mashed with OH-13, and possibly IL-17, ironically one of the few GOP-held seats on the list (although it might instead wind up getting turned into a significantly bluer district by the now-Dem-controlled Illinois legislature). Instead, as I mentioned earlier, many of these districts are going to wind up reaching out further into the suburbs… in many cases, expanding to follow the same constituents who just moved out of the city (for instance, all the Detroit residents who moved across 8 Mile into MI-12).

District Rep. 2000 2010 Change
LA-02 Richmond (D) 639,048 493,352 – 145,696
MI-13 Clarke (D) 662,844 519,570 – 143,274
MI-14 Conyers (D) 662,468 550,465 – 112,003
OH-11 Fudge (D) 630,668 540,432 – 90,236
IL-01 Rush (D) 654,203 587,596 – 66,607
PA-14 Doyle (D) 645,809 584,493 – 61,316
IL-04 Gutierrez (D) 653,654 601,156 – 52,498
IL-02 Jackson (D) 654,078 602,758 – 51,320
MS-02 Thompson (D) 710,996 668,263 – 42,733
NY-28 Slaughter (D) 654,464 611,838 – 42,626
MO-01 Clay (D) 621,497 587,069 – 34,428
PA-12 Critz (D) 646,419 612,384 – 34,035
AL-07 Sewell (D) 635,631 603,352 – 32,279
OH-01 Chabot (R) 630,545 598,699 – 31,846
OH-10 Kucinich (D) 631,003 599,205 – 31,798
OH-17 Ryan (D) 630,316 600,111 – 30,205
CA-31 Becerra (D) 639,248 611,336 – 27,912
MI-05 Kildee (D) 662,584 635,129 – 27,455
MI-12 Levin (D) 662,559 636,601 – 25,958
NY-27 Higgins (D) 654,200 629,271 – 24,929
IL-09 Schakowsky (D) 653,117 628,859 – 24,258
NY-11 Clarke (D) 654,134 632,408 – 21,726
TN-09 Cohen (D) 631,740 610,823 – 20,917
IL-17 Schilling (R) 653,531 634,792 – 18,739
PA-02 Fattah (D) 647,350 630,277 – 17,073

Much more over the flip…

Now, let’s switch over to counties. Counties are a unit of analysis that don’t get talked about at SSP as much as congressional districts, despite the fact that they’re more useful for talking about historical trends because their boundaries (almost) never change over the decades; the rationale, I suppose, is that much of the nation’s population lives in huge counties that contain multiple (or in the case of Los Angeles County, more than a dozen) CDs, so in many cases it’s not as granular a sort (and conversely, counties turn into too-granular a sort if you’re interested in, say, Kansas or west Texas).

Still, looking at which counties gained the most population in raw numbers, it provides an interesting counterpoint to the biggest-gaining CDs. While you’d get the impression of impending utter Republican dominance by looking at the party IDs of which CDs have excess population to shed, looking at the nation’s largest counties shows that, when you balance out the parts and pieces that make up the various CDs, many of the counties have very swingy results at the presidential level. I was also planning to look at changes in racial composition by county as well as by CD in the coming days, so it’ll also become quite evident (if you hadn’t already mentally extrapolated from which CDs are in which counties) that much of the growth coming in these fastest-growing counties is coming from non-whites.

County 08 Results 2000 2010 Change
Maricopa, AZ 44/54 3,072,149 3,817,117 744,968
Harris, TX 50/49 3,400,578 4,092,459 691,881
Riverside, CA 50/48 1,541,387 2,189,641 644,254
Clark, NV 58/39 1,375,765 1,951,269 575,504
Tarrant, TX 44/55 1,466,219 1,809,034 362,815
San Bernardino, CA 52/46 1,709,434 2,035,210 325,776
Bexar, TX 52/47 1,392,931 1,714,773 321,842
Los Angeles, CA 69/29 9,519,338 9,818,605 299,267
Collin, TX 37/62 491,675 782,341 290,666
San Diego, CA 54/44 2,813,833 3,095,313 281,480
Wake, NC 57/42 627,846 900,993 273,147
Orange, FL 59/40 896,344 1,145,956 249,612
Miami-Dade, FL 58/42 2,253,362 2,496,435 243,073
Fort Bend, TX 48/51 354,452 585,375 230,923
Hillsborough, FL 53/46 998,948 1,229,226 230,278
Denton, TX 37/62 432,976 662,614 229,638
Mecklenburg, NC 62/37 695,454 919,628 224,174
Gwinnett, GA 44/55 588,448 805,321 216,873
Travis, TX 64/34 812,280 1,024,266 211,986
Hidalgo, TX 69/30 569,463 774,769 205,306
Pinal, AZ 42/56 179,727 375,770 196,043
Sacramento, CA 58/39 1,223,499 1,418,788 195,289
King, WA 70/28 1,737,034 1,931,249 194,215
Palm Beach, FL 61/38 1,131,184 1,320,134 188,950
Kern, CA 40/58 661,645 839,631 177,986

The counties with the biggest numeric loss, on the other hand, are almost all Democratic ones with a few exceptions from the New Orleans suburbs. Some are Dem strongholds that are just intensifying (like Cook County, home of Chicago, whose blueness we kind of take for granted these days… Mike Dukakis won it only 56-43). Others are onetime solid Dem counties that have turned swingy as older ex-unionists die off and educated young voters book their tickets elsewhere (like the western Pennsylvania and West Virginia counties).

County 08 Results 2000 2010 Change
Wayne, MI 74/25 2,061,162 1,820,584 – 240,578
Cook, IL 76/23 5,376,741 5,194,675 – 182,066
Orleans, LA 79/19 484,674 343,829 – 140,845
Cuyahoga, OH 69/30 1,393,978 1,280,122 – 113,856
Allegheny, PA 57/42 1,281,666 1,223,348 – 58,318
Hamilton, OH 53/46 845,303 802,374 – 42,929
St. Bernard, LA 26/71 67,229 35,897 – 31,332
Erie, NY 58/40 950,265 919,040 – 31,225
Baltimore city, MD 87/12 651,154 620,961 – 30,193
St. Louis city, MO 84/16 348,189 319,294 – 28,895
Montgomery, OH 52/46 559,062 535,153 – 23,909
Jefferson, LA 36/62 455,466 432,552 – 22,914
Mahoning, OH 62/36 257,555 238,823 – 18,732
St. Louis, MO 60/40 1,016,315 998,954 – 17,361
Trumbull, OH 60/37 225,116 210,312 – 14,804
Lucas, OH 65/33 455,054 441,815 – 13,239
Fayette, PA 49/50 148,644 136,606 – 12,038
Washington, MS 67/32 62,977 51,137 – 11,840
Beaver, PA 48/50 181,412 170,539 – 10,873
Genesee, MI 65/33 436,141 425,790 – 10,351
Saginaw, MI 58/40 210,039 200,169 – 9,870
Essex, NJ 76/23 793,633 783,969 – 9,664
Hampton city, VA 69/30 146,437 137,436 – 9,001
Cambria, PA 49/48 152,598 143,679 – 8,919
Kanawha, WV 49/49 200,073 193,063 – 7,010

While looking at congressional districts by percentage of change isn’t that interesting (as they all start from a very similar baseline, giving you almost the same results as raw numeric change), it’s worth a deeper look with counties, because counties come in a wide variety of sizes and the fastest-gainers by population don’t dovetail much with the fastest-gainers by percentage. The percentage gainers tend to smaller counties that are poised at the very edge of metropolitan growth, making the transition from rural to exurban. Case in point: #1 Kendall County, which is where you wind up if you find already-exurban Kane County and then head south, to where Chicagoland meets the prairie. The bigger-name counties on this list, like Loudoun County, Virginia, Douglas County, Colorado, and Collin and Fort Bend Counties, Texas, are some of the archetypal exurbs of decades past, which are starting to diversify and make the stylistic transition from exurb to outer-ring suburb… and their voting patterns are starting to change too, with Loudoun turning light-blue and Douglas and Collin still pretty red but making sharp moves in 2008.

County 08 Results 2000 2010 Change
Kendall, IL 53/46 54,544 114,736 2.10
Pinal, AZ 42/56 179,727 375,770 2.09
Flagler, FL 50/49 49,832 95,696 1.92
Lincoln, SD 42/57 24,131 44,828 1.86
Loudoun, VA 54/45 169,599 312,311 1.84
Rockwall, TX 26/73 43,080 78,337 1.82
Forsyth, GA 20/78 98,407 175,511 1.78
Sumter, FL 36/63 53,345 93,420 1.75
Paulding, GA 30/69 81,678 142,324 1.74
Sublette, WY 21/76 5,920 10,247 1.73
Henry, GA 46/53 119,341 203,922 1.71
Teton, ID 49/49 5,999 10,170 1.70
Williamson, TX 43/55 249,967 422,679 1.69
Fort Bend, TX 48/51 354,452 585,375 1.65
Union, NC 36/63 123,677 201,292 1.63
Douglas, CO 41/58 175,766 285,465 1.62
Dallas, IA 46/52 40,750 66,135 1.62
Newton, GA 50/49 62,001 99,958 1.61
Hays, TX 48/50 97,589 157,107 1.61
Collin, TX 37/62 491,675 782,341 1.59
Franklin, WA 37/61 49,347 78,163 1.58
Delaware, OH 40/59 109,989 174,214 1.58
Forest, PA 42/55 4,946 7,716 1.56
Osceola, FL 59/40 172,493 268,685 1.56
Montgomery, TX 23/76 293,768 455,746 1.55

Finally, here are the biggest losing counties by percentage. Unfortunately, beyond the obvious Orleans Parish (and several other smaller Louisiana parishes obliterated by hurricanes), it’s a bunch of counties that you’ve probably never heard of, most of which are very tiny. Beyond that, it tells us that blindingly-red western Kansas and western North Dakota are losing population, as well as the Texas and Oklahoma Panhandles… and also dark-blue, mostly-black rural counties in the Mississippi Delta, which was seen in MS-02’s population loss. The list continues on like that ad nauseam; the next county with a population over 100,000 is all the way down at #148: Wayne County, MI, which is 88% of its 2000 size. St. Louis city and Cuyahoga County, OH follow along at 92%.

County 08 Results 2000 2010 Change
St. Bernard, LA 26/71 67,229 35,897 0.53
Issaquena, MS 61/38 2,274 1,406 0.62
Cameron, LA 16/81 9,991 6,839 0.68
Orleans, LA 79/19 484,674 343,829 0.71
Sharkey, MS 68/31 6,580 4,916 0.75
Chattahoochee, GA 50/49 14,882 11,267 0.76
Sheridan, ND 29/69 1,710 1,321 0.77
Kiowa, KS 18/80 3,278 2,553 0.78
Towner, ND 52/45 2,876 2,246 0.78
Cimarron, OK 12/88 3,148 2,475 0.79
Cottle, TX 27/72 1,904 1,505 0.79
Jefferson, MS 87/12 9,740 7,726 0.79
Tensas, LA 54/45 6,618 5,252 0.79
Monroe, AR 47/51 10,254 8,149 0.79
King, TX 5/93 356 286 0.80
Culberson, TX 65/34 2,975 2,398 0.81
Esmeralda, NV 24/69 971 783 0.81
McDowell, WV 53/45 27,329 22,113 0.81
Jewell, KS 20/78 3,791 3,077 0.81
Claiborne, MS 86/14 11,831 9,604 0.81
Washington, MS 67/32 62,977 51,137 0.81
Lane, KS 19/79 2,155 1,750 0.81
Quitman, MS 67/32 10,117 8,223 0.81
Greeley, KS 20/79 1,534 1,247 0.81
Swift, MN 55/42 11,956 9,783 0.82

AZ-01: Ann Kirkpatrick (D) Says She’ll Seek a Rematch

AZ-01 district map

This is unexpected – and interesting:

Former Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, a freshman Democrat ousted in last year’s Republican tidal wave, is angling for a rematch against Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz. She told AZ/DC Tuesday that she has made the decision to run for her seat again in 2012. …

“It’s clear to me, now that Paul Gosar has a record, that he is toeing the party line rather than serving the district,” she said. “The real key for me is the number of people who I’ve been hearing from in the district — and this is Democrats, independents, Republicans and even folks who are actively involved in the ‘tea party’ — that they feel he is deeply out-of-touch with the district.”

Kirkpatrick said she hopes the 2012 political climate will be more hospitable to her candidacy because it is a presidential year and likely will have a bigger turnout.

I’m not sure that this comeback had really been on our radar. In fact, I apart from randomly appearing in a PPP poll a little while back, her name hasn’t come up on SSP since the November election. Most commentators wrote her off at one point or another last year – we eventually moved the race to Lean R. Kirkpatrick wound up losing, of course, but by a not-entire-horribly six points. (By comparison, Carol Shea-Porter was also universally considered to be in a “Lean R” race, and she lost by double that margin.) So perhaps she has enough mojo to stage a comeback.

(As an aside, I’d also point out that Kirkpatrick was the Dem in the reddest seat who both voted for healthcare reform and against the Stupak amendment-as a freshman, no less.)

Of course, there’s the little matter of redistricting, but as the article notes, both Gosar and Kirkpatrick hail from Flagstaff, so if there’s a district for them to run in after the state’s independent commission gets done with its work, they’ll both be in it. AZ-01 is also one of those seats that you’re pretty much required to describe as “sprawling” – it is, in fact, the tenth-largest by area (and fifth among non-at-large states). So unless mapmakers get very creative, it’s hard to imagine this behemoth won’t still exist in some form or another come next year.

HI-Sen: Lingle Performs Poorly Against All Dems

Hawaii panorama

Public Policy Polling for Daily Kos/SEIU (3/24-27, Hawaii voters, no trendlines):

Ed Case (D): 52

Linda Lingle (R): 35

Undecided: 12

Colleen Hanabusa (D): 51

Linda Lingle (R): 40

Undecided: 9

Mufi Hannemann (D): 47

Linda Lingle (R): 40

Undecided: 14

Mazie Hirono (D): 52

Linda Lingle (R): 40

Undecided: 9

Ed Case (D): 50

Duke Aiona (R): 35

Undecided: 15

Colleen Hanabusa (D): 48

Duke Aiona (R): 43

Undecided: 9

Mufi Hannemann (D): 42

Duke Aiona (R): 42

Undecided: 16

Mazie Hirono (D): 49

Duke Aiona (R): 42

Undecided: 10

Ed Case (D): 53

Charles Djou (R): 35

Undecided: 12

Colleen Hanabusa (D): 50

Charles Djou (R): 40

Undecided: 10

Mufi Hannemann (D): 46

Charles Djou (R): 40

Undecided: 14

Mazie Hirono (D): 51

Charles Djou (R): 40

Undecided: 9

(MoE: ±3.3%)

In the wake of Sen. Dan Akaka’s retirement announcement, Beltway pundits started talking up the chances of Linda Lingle, the recently termed-out Republican governor. This chatter ignored quite a few things: the fact that Lingle left office pretty unpopular after eight years (41-56 job approvals); that 2010’s massive red tide failed to wash up on Hawaii’s shores (GOP Rep. Charles Djou lost to Colleen Hanabusa; Dem Neil Abercrombie won the gubernatorial race over then-Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona in a landslide); and that a dude named Barack Obama would be on the top of the ticket next year (the native son won by 45 points in 2008).

Now, to imagine Lingle might be competitive, there’s one more piece of evidence that will have to get ignored: this poll. With her underwater 41-51 favorable rating, she can’t crack 40% against any Democrat, even the least popular among them, former Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann (39-48 favorables). And indeed Hanabusa, Rep. Mazie Hirono, and ex-Rep. Ed Case all clear 50 against her. If Lingle’s own internal polls are showing markedly different numbers, then I think she’s deluding herself. Of course, Aiona fares only slightly better, while Djou does no better than Lingle, but if Hawaii Republicans want to take on a hopeless suicide mission, they’re welcome to do so.

One final note: If you weren’t familiar with Hawaii politics, you might take a look at these numbers and say, “Wow! Who is this Ed Case guy? He performs the best of all the Dems, and does really well among independent voters!” These things are true, but don’t be fooled: Ed Case has a long conservative pedigree as scion of the (now-defunct) Democratic Leadership Committee, the same corporatist outfit which more or less gave Joe Lieberman a reason for being. I won’t spill a lot of electrons on him right now, but I’m sure commenters will regale you with his greatest hits. I am somewhat surprised to see his favorables are so strong (51-30), despite running in a nasty special election last year which tarnished both Djou (40-47) and Hanabusa (45-41).

But while these numbers might offer Case an “electability” argument, all Dems are clearly capable of winning – and what’s more, Case would have to make it out of a primary first. So it’s important to look at each Dem’s favorables among members of their own party:

Hirono: 72-16

Hanabusa: 65-19

Case: 50-30

Hannemann: 44-44

That’s going to be tough for Case to pull off (and Hannemann, too – his negative primary against Abercrombie last year seems to be hurting him). But Hirono and Hanabusa should talk, though, and figure out which of them ought to run, because in a multi-way race, Case could definitely sneak through, and we definitely do not want that.

Virginia Redistricting: Legislature’s Proposed State Senate Maps

Discussion is already underway on the new maps for Virginia’s state House and Senate that the legislature just proposed. Fortunately, map guru jeffmd extracted much more readable maps from the shapefiles provided by the state. There are actually two Senate proposals, one from Sen. John Watkins (R) and the other from Sen. Janet Howell (D).


Click for full-size version


Click for full-size version

Detail maps of Northern Virginia and the Hampton Roads areas (including versions which show aggregate political performance from the 2009 Gov., Lt. Gov., and AG results, plus the 2008 presidential results) are below the fold.

Howell Northern Virginia:

Watkins Northern Virginia:

Howell Hampton Roads:

Click for full-size version

Watkins Hampton Roads:

Click for full-size version

CA Maps by Cook Report – Analyzed

At the end of last week the Cook Political Report came out with a set of district lines as an approximation of what the Citizens Redistricting Commission would create.    The lead to their story reads:

What happens when politicians who have grown accustomed to the luxury of choosing their voters are forced to cede redistricting authority to a group of amateur citizen commissioners? In this gigantic laboratory of reform, more than a handful of incumbents are rightfully fearful they will be sacrificed for science. House Editor David Wasserman maps out some of the most talked-about speculative scenarios and outlines who could be in trouble. A “blank slate” commission map could endanger up to 15 incumbents and create as many as five new opportunities for Hispanic candidates

The Cook report identifies a number of Congressional members who are in the most gerrymandered seats and need to be concerned about redistricting.  These include:


Dan Lungren (CA-03)

Elton Gallegly (CA-24)

David Dreier (CA-26)

Gary Miller (CA-42)

Ken Calvert (CA-44)


Jerry McNerney (CA-11)

Sam Farr (CA-17)

Dennis Cardoza (CA-18)

Jim Costa (CA-20)

Brad Sherman (CA-27)

Howard Berman (CA-28)

Laura Richardson (CA-37)

Grace Napolitano (CA-38)

Bob Filner (CA-51)

and whoever wins the CA-36 special election in June.

Criticizing maps is easy, while drawing them can be a challenging task.  Some of the shortcomings we identify in the Cook Plan could be a function of them not having access to the same data tools.  However, given that this is the first widespread release of a legitimate plan from a trustworthy source, it requires some honest analysis.

Overall there are several things that are right and wrong with the plan.

What’s right about the Cook Maps:

1)    The shift from the coastal area to the Central Valley and Inland Empire reflect a current reality – and an unavoidable result of the redistricting process.

2)    Bay Area districts don’t cross the Bay Bridge or Golden Gate.  This preserves county/city lines and communities of interest, but would weaken the city of San Francisco if the same rule was applied to the Senate districts.

3)    The plan appears to keep more cities and counties intact than the 2001 plan.

4)    While competitiveness is not an official criteria, it is meaningful in the public’s eye, and this plan makes several districts more competitive.

What’s wrong:

1)    The plan plays way too loose with the Voting Rights Act, retrogressing several Section 2 districts, splitting the Section 5 county of Merced, and putting Kings County into a totally different seat.  In fact, it appears to water down the Citizen Voting Age Latino Population in every Section 5 district except Herger (which is only 10% Latino CVAP currently).

2)    Several districts, particularly the Dreier (CD 26) seat, cross county lines unnecessarily and oddly so that they run afoul with several criteria, including geographic compactness and maintaining communities of interest.

3)    The City of LA does not seem to be preserved at all.  Several little cities are merged with the larger city.  This could be due to the inability to truly see the city lines in the application they were using.

The data tables on my page go through each district to review ethnic and partisan changes in the districts.  The analysis was done only after redrawing the lines in Maptitude, the database/mapping software that is being used by the Commission.

The data used in this analysis comes from the latest US Census release and the Beta release of data from Political Data Inc. which allows census-block level analysis of party affiliation, voter turnout, results and electoral modeling.

Ethnic Breakdown Tables

The charts on my site provide ethnic breakdown of the 53 districts in the Cook plan.  Section 5 and Section 2 Majority-Minority districts are highlighted in red.  A Majority-Minority district for the purposes of this analysis is the most liberal interpretation – one that is majority Latino in 18+ Population or Citizen Voting Age Population.

Of the 11 Majority-Minority Latino or Section 5 seats in California, all but three of them have retrogressed under the Cook Plan.

Several other interesting seats are highlighted in orange.  These include the Barbara Lee and Laura Richardson seats, both of which lose African American voting strength, while Mike Honda and Doris Matsui see slight increases in Asian populations.

Partisan/Voting Behavior Breakdown

The the second set of data charts voter registration and partisan turnout.  This is built from census-block level geocoded County voter files and only available through Political Data Inc.

The double digit shifts AWAY from the party in control of that seat are noted in red.  The only double-digit improvements are for Billbray and Royce, however the Billbray improvement could have to do with a district number-switch that was uncorrected from the Cook Plan.

Note on Data: Ethnic totals are 2010 official Census release for redistricting.  Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) is estimates from the Census Department released in February 2011.  Voter registration data is directly from the current statewide voter file managed by Political Data Inc.

This Memo availalable in PDF: Cook Uncooked

Maps and Charts: Cook Uncooked

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

SSP Daily Digest: 3/30


AZ-Sen: Jeff Flake then:

That’s the difficulty of a campaign. I mean, it’s easy to just say, “Seal the border and enforce the law.” What does that really mean? What does that entail? And when you’re able to explain it, then they’re alright. And I think for those who don’t agree with my position-think that it ought to be something different-at least I think they give me a little credit for sticking with my position because I’ve always believed this is what we need and I continue to believe regardless of the political environment.

Jeff Flake now:

In the past I have supported a broad approach to immigration reform – increased border security coupled with a temporary worker program. I no longer do. I’ve been down that road, and it is a dead end. The political realities in Washington are such that a comprehensive solution is not possible, or even desirable, given the current leadership.

In other AZ news, the subscription-only Arizona Guardian says that ex-Rep. Matt Salmon may endorse Rep. Trent Franks, rather than his old buddy Flake (who succeeded him in Congress when he unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2002), something they characterize as a “snub” on their home page. Franks of course hasn’t announced a run yet, but Dave Catanese claims he’ll do so this Saturday. Just hope whoever told Dave this is more truthful than the dipshit who dissembled about Connie Mack last week. (And I still maintain that Dave had every right-if not an obligation-to burn that source.)

FL-Sen: Adam Hasner has to be feeling pretty good about himself these days. Rep. Connie Mack inartfully bowed out of the race, and Mike Haridopolos has already scored a few own-goals. So the former state House Majority Leader took to his Facebook to declare that “this election still needs a proven limited government leader, who is solid across the board on the conservative principles.” Why golly, that sounds just like Hasner, doesn’t it?

IN-Sen, IN-02: Rep. Joe Donnelly sure sounds like he’s interested in running for Senate. He told Robert Annis, a reporter for the Indianapolis Star, that he thinks his “experience is best served in the Senate.” Annis also characterized Donnelly as “leaning toward” a run. A different reporter at the same event characterized him as “leaning strongly toward” a Senate bid if the GOP makes his current district redder.

MI-Sen: PPP has the remainders from their Michigan poll last week, a kitchen sink GOP primary:

Pete Hoekstra is the clear first choice of Republicans in the state for who they’d like as their nominee to take on Debbie Stabenow next year. 38% say he’d be their pick compared to 18% for Terri Lynn Land. No one else cracks double digits, with Saul Anuzis at 5%, Justin Amash, Randy Hekman, and Tim Walberg at 4%, Chad Dewey at 3%, and Tim Leuliette with the big egg at 0%.

Speaking of The Hook, he said he’ll decide whether to challenge Stabenow in two weeks. In an amusing side note, Hoekstra admitted he got all butthurt when MI GOP chair Bobby Schostak said in a recent interview that he expects a candidate to emerge who is ” head and shoulders” above the current crop of potentials-a group which obviously includes Hoekstra. Of course, Schostak also said of this mystery candidates: “I don’t know who it is. They haven’t met with me yet, if they’re out there.” We don’t know who they are either!

NV-Sen: Rep. Dean Heller, presumably trying to scare off would-be primary opponents, raised a pretty massive $125K in a single event in Vegas on Monday night.

OH-Sen, OH-12: This is… getting strange. Top-tier Ohio Republicans have all pretty much taken a pass on challenging Sherrod Brown, or at least seem to be leaning against a run. But one guy all of a sudden put his name into the hopper: Rep. Pat Tiberi, who sits in the very swingish 12th CD. Tiberi’s spokesman made sure to remind Dave Catanese that he’s on Ways & Means, though, so that’s a pretty tasty perch to give up. Catanese also notes that state Sen. Kevin Coughlin is preparing a run.

RI-Sen: I guess rich guy Barry Hinckley is running against Sheldon Whitehouse? The founder of a software company called Bullhorn (“the global leader in On Demand, integrated front office software for the staffing and recruiting industry”), Hinckley is apparently trying to burnish his Republican credentials by holding some fundraisers at California yacht clubs. (Not joking about that.)


LA-Gov: 2010 Lt. Gov. nominee Caroline Fayard is starting to sound very much like a gubernatorial candidate… that is, if you can hear her over her foot-stuffed-in-mouth. She didn’t do much to help her cause by declaring at a recent even that she “hates Republicans” because they are “cruel” and “eat their young.” (Uh, I talk a lot of shit about the GOP, but what does “eat their young” even mean?) Fayard later tried to wiggle her way out of this by claiming “I’m against the president, but I don’t need to see his birth certificate.” So she’s managed to kill her crossover vote and her support among African Americans in one fell swoop. Well, uh, she sure is getting some free media out of this. (Hat tip: Daily Kingfish)


CT-05: I guess I thought that former state Rep. Elizabeth Esty (D) had already announced she was running for Chris Murphy’s seat, but apparently she’s only just formed an exploratory committee.

MN-06: It’s not particularly meaningful, since the funds can be transferred to another federal account, but Michele Bachmann did just file to run for re-election yesterday.

NY-25, VA-02: Dan Maffei apparently says he’ll decide on a rematch “in the next two months,” while Glenn Nye (I’d forgotten he was still considering) will wait until “sometime in the summer.” (That’s how The Hill phrased it in both cases.)

RI-01: With the city of Providence’s finances imploding, freshman Rep. David Cicilline is taking a beating over his stewardship of the city he used to be mayor of. Among other things, a new Brown University poll finds him with a statewide approval rating of just 17-49. Could Cicilline be vulnerable in the general election? I doubt it, but he could underperform annoyingly and require help that could best be expended elsewhere, like a Paul Kanjorski. I think he might be more at risk in a primary.

Other Races:

Wisconsin Recall: In just the last two months, the Wisconsin Democratic Party reports raising $1.4 million-or, a quarter million more than it did in all of 2010. In other news, a coordinator of the petition drive against Randy Hopper seems to have gone off-message with his intimation that volunteers would have “closer to 30,000 than 15,000” signatures by Tuesday (a month before the deadline). 15,269 sigs are needed for the recall to happen, but a spokesperson for the Democratic Party told the Journal Sentinel that these figures (such as they are) “are not accurate” and wouldn’t say more. Quite understandably, t’s pretty much been the policy of the party not to talk about where things stand.

Wisconsin Sup. Ct.: JoAnne Kloppenburg is out with TV and radio ads that tout her independence.


WATN?: Artur Davis, douchebag from beyond the grave. This is actually the same link as the NY-25/VA-02 item above; Davis did an event with Maffei and Nye at which he said that President Obama would bear the brunt of the blame for any government shutdown. Davis’s claim: “I think that voters always focus on the executive as the responsible officer.” That’s why Bill Clinton lost so badly in 1996, right?

In other WATN? news, I’m guessing that ex-Rep. Bart Gordon (D) is probably ruling out a run for the seat he voluntarily gave up last year (TN-06), or a Senate bid – he just took a job at the law firm of K&L Gates. (The “Gates” is Bill Gates, Sr., the Microsoft founder’s dad, who is now retired.)

Redistricting Roundup:

Indiana: Have an idea for an Indiana state Senate map? Sen. Tim Lane (D) wants to hear from you! (Seriously!) Contact information is at the link.

Louisiana: Even though he had said he’d stay out of it, Gov. Bobby Jindal’s been weighing in on the redistricting process-and Dems, as you might guess, aren’t happy about it. Click through the article to learn more about the exact nature of the dispute. Ultimately, though, it sounds as though Jindal will get his way, which more or less preserves the status quo.

Funnymanders: What happens when a very careful redistricting job blows up in your face because the state Senate Majority Leader’s son being groomed for the new seat tells the media he can’t even remember being arrested for getting into a dispute over chicken fingers at Applebee’s? Well, I’m calling that a funnymander. Nathan Gonzales has the details on that story, and a few other anecdotes as well, about redistricting gone awry.

Dark Money: On the darker side of redistricting is all the unregulated cash flooding into various coffers, which Politico takes a look at. A big reason is an FEC decision last year which allowed members of Congress to raise unlimited soft money for redistricting groups, and both Dems and Republicans are, of course, going at it full bore.

The Land of Lincoln: The Land of Huge Swings; or why I doubt a 14-4 is at all realistic

Illinois is one of the few prizes for Democrats going into the 2010 round of redistricting.  Republicans currently control the delegation, having swung four sitting Democratic congressmen out of office in 2010.  There are only eight Democrats currently to 11 Republicans in the delegation, which must shrink by one.  But as luck would have it, Governor Quinn managed to narrowly become elected to a full first term, and Democrats managed to hold onto their majorities in both chambers of the state legislature.  Thus, Democrats get to draw the map and it will likely be a savage map toward the GOP.

Okay this much is known, and many people have drawn Democratic gerrymanders; indeed I am currently working on a 12-5-1 map myself that will be posted in a week or two once I tabulate all the precinct data (which is taking forever!).  

This, however, is a more focused diary.  It argues that Illinois is a land of massive swings between 2004, 2008, and 2010 and that only by drawing a map that survives these three cycles can one be really sure that they are drawing a Democratic map versus a dummymander.  Our base got energized in 2008 but did not turn out in 2010, and that was most pronounced in the suburbs where many of us want to draw new Democratic seats.  It is not that the GOP vote went up much, but rather that our vote plummeted, and plummeted more than probably elsewhere in the country given the home-state effect in 2008.  Kerry’s vote in 2004, although dated, shows us a neutral year and it should be read also as cautionary regarding the vote pluralities a Democratic candidate can expect.

One more thing: although I include Alexi numbers here, Illinois is a state without party registration and a state full of moderates and independents.  Really to be truly safe in a 2010 style election, I believe you must look in the weeds and look down-ballot at which lever voters were pulling for Congress rather than which one they were pulling for governor or senator.  Certainly I would imagine that politicians who have to win elections are doing just this thing right now as they contemplate how they want to carve up the state.  

To make these points, I look into the weeds of one district in my budding map, a new Democratic-leaning 14th to elect Bill Foster back into Congress, connecting Aurora, and Joliet along with Elgin and Dekalb.  I imagine that Lake County/northern Cook will show a similar pattern when I get there, as will Rockford, Peoria, Springfield, etc.  But for now let’s look at the new 14th that I am hoping will get drawn.


New District 14th (Hultgren is being drawn, along with Roskam and Biggert, into a super Republican vote sink starting in Republican areas of Kane and snaking through Dupage and ending in super Republican areas of Will).  Foster lives in Batavia so this would be “his” district unless a Joliet politician primaried him.

Racial data: 49.3% white, 33.5% Hispanic, 11.1% Black, 4.4% Asian, thus technically “majority-minority” which was unintended but fortuitous all the same.  Illinois just amended its redistricting statute to emphasize, wherever possible and consistent with the VRA, the creation of coalition districts.  Also, the more I think it through, and the politics of it, I find it hard to convince myself that Democrats in Springfield will actually draw a second Hispanic seat, or that doing so would be required.  Hispanics still don’t vote in any sizable numbers in Chicago (look at the wards that Gutierrez has now if you doubt this), so would 65% and 57% districts really give Hispanics sufficient VRA protection to be able to select a candidate of their choice?  I am increasingly dubious.  So, draw a coalition district like this, plus one probably for Lipinski and you have something that is a compromise.

2010 congressional ballot (aggregating Foster, Harper, and Halvorson votes for areas pulled from the current 14th, 13th, and 11th, assuming for the sake of argument that a Democratic vote for congressman/woman in one district is a generic Democratic vote in another).

Generic Dem-Generic Rep: 80,538-67,285 (54.48%)

Some notable areas:

Aurora: 11,932-6,691

Elgin: 10,220-8,767

Dekalb: 5906-4004

Joliet: 12,461-6,331

Alexi does a bit worse but still carries this district slightly 50.74% to 49.26%, so it suggests to me that it would have withstood the 2010 GOP tidal wave (just).  Without knowing at all what the next ten years will bring, but being a bit cautious-minded, this might model well for what a 2014 2nd Obama midterm election (assuming his reelection) might look like, or for that matter 2018.  Our voters are more prone not to show up in off-year elections whereas the GOP’s are; it is a huge problem, and one that that we ought to be very realistic about when we draw our maps.

Okay, let’s look at two years earlier when Obama romped to his 25 point landslide in his home state.

Obama 161,485 – McCain 85,174 (65.47%… look at the swing between the two years)

Notable areas:

Aurora: 21,472-7,444

Elgin: 20,394-9,858

DeKalb: 12,456-4,333

Joliet: 22,748-6,023

Notice an alarming pattern here?  While we carried all four of these reliably Democratic cities in both cycles, the all-crucial pluralities coming out of them simply plummeted.  The less Democratic areas in the seat used to connect the cities did swing from Obama to generic Republican between 2008 and 2010 but this doesn’t account for the swing so much as our voters simply not showing up.  

Now, finally, let’s look at what a 2016 election without an Illinoian at the top of the ticket might look like.  We know what this probably looks like because we have Kerry 2004 to look at.  Again, Kerry would have carried my district, and by a healthy 54-46% margin.  But the Obama 2008 turnout numbers were historic and probably cannot be counted on across an entire decade worth of political cycles.

(Caveat: Will County doesn’t have publicly-available precinct data going back before 2005, much to my annoyance.  What I did, therefore, was estimate what the likely vote share would have been for the part of Will in this district by extrapolating its 2008 numbers back onto 2004…. E.g., if 60% of Obama’s total 2008 vote came from this portion alone, I am assuming that 60% of Kerry’s county-wide total came from this portion as well.  A bit of an if given likely greater turnout in Joliet than elsewhere, but probably not affecting the topline total much).

119,000 Kerry – 101,000 Bush (~54%)

Notable areas:

Aurora: 17,249-13,057

Elgin: 14,359-14,486

DeKalb: 10,118-6,957

Joliet: probably 16-17,000 Kerry, 8-9,000 Bush

Having eyeballed the data for the rest of the state but not actually tallied it up precinct-by-precinct yet beyond some of the Chicagoland seats, I can vouch for this being repeated in loads of other places in the state other than Chicago.  Chicago turned out fine in 2010; it is why Governor Quinn was re-elected.  The rest of the coalition that adds up with Chicago to form 55-57% of the electorate most neutral years did not, and that is why we have Republicans representing Joliet, the Fox Valley, and Rock Island of all places.

Redistricting Arizona U.S. House Districts

AZ-01 (Gosar): 57% White, 21% Native American, 18% Hispanic, 1% Black, 1% Asian – leans Republican but is winnable for Democrats


AZ-02 (Franks): 65% White, 28% Hispanic, 2% Black, 2% Asian, 1% Native American (connects Prescott with Yuma) – Safe Republican


AZ-03 (Quayle): 75% White, 16% Hispanic, 4% Asian, 3% Black, 1% Native American – Safe Republican


AZ-04 (Pastor): 56% Hispanic, 31% White, 6% Black, 3% Asian, 2% Native American (Hispanic VRA district) – Safe Democratic


AZ-05 (Schweikert): 49% White, 35% Hispanic, 6% Black, 4% Asian, 3% Native American (Tempe; connects a small Indian reservation with liberal whites) – Lean to Likely Democratic I think


AZ-06 (Flake): 81% White, 12% Hispanic, 3% Asian, 2% Black, 1% Native American – Safe Republican


AZ-07 (Grijalva): 53% Hispanic, 33% White, 5% Black, 5% Native American, 2% Asian (VRA District) – probably safe Democratic


AZ-08 (Giffords): 66% White, 25% Hispanic, 3% Black, 3% Asian, 1% Native American  – Safe for Giffords if she runs again; if she doesn’t the Republicans have a good chance of picking this seat up


AZ-09 (New Seat): 69% White, 20% Hispanic, 3.5% Black 2.5% Asian, 1% Native American – Safe Republican


Phoenix close-up (AZ-01 – Gray, AZ-02 – Light Pink, AZ-03 – Purple, AZ-04 – Light Gray, AZ-05 – Yellow, AZ-06 – Green, AZ-07 – Blue, AZ-08 – Neon Green, AZ-09 – Rose)


Tucson close-up


NY State with 2010 Census Data

I am now glad that NYS’ data is up on Dave’s App.  This is my homestate.  I wanted to clean the map up visually and keep minimal unnecessary county divisions.

Below are the maps.

I start from 27 and go to 1.

Operative definitions:

even as up to 52%, leans from 52-55% and strong as greater than 55%

Upstate (The black squares show about where the Upstate representatives’ residences are.)


27.  Higgins gains all of Buffalo and most of Cattaraugus County.  This becomes as strong Democrat district.

26. OPEN.  I think this could go either way.  This is a LaFalce-style district with the northtowns, then stretching through Niagara and Orleans Counties to pick up towns in western Monroe County that Rep. Slaughter may never have represented, or at least not since the 1980s.  It then dips into the northern tier of Genesee County.  This is  probably close to even, but would most likely vote Rep.

25.  Slaughter’s 1990s district was just eastern Monroe County.  She now picks up just about the entire county minus Clarkson, Sweden (Brockport) and Riga (Churchville).  This is a strong Dem. district.

24.  Reed’s Southern Tier district becomes a Genesee River Valley and Finger Lakes.  This is a strong Rep. district.

23. This is the district where Buerkle lives, but this is a strong Dem. district now with Syracuse, Auburn, and Ithaca together.

These five districts combined are three NYS tourism regions.  A map of that is below.

22. This is Hanna’s district, which becomes a Central-Leatherstocking district.  This is even, depending on who votes more: Binghamton/Utica or Rome/rurals.

21. The Capital Region is strongly Dem.  It’s Rep. Tomko’s for the taking.

20.  Owens’ Adirondack district cleans up without Madison County in his district.  It’s still even, but with Owens’ now a two-term rep, he has the benefit of incumbency.  This is Thousand Islands-Adirondacks as per the tourism district map.

19. Gibson’s district stops its sprawl and is now and eastern Hudson banks district.  Hayworth can easily be merged into this district, but I have her on this map with Lowey.  Westchester can easily me rearranged to put both freshman Republicans together.  With Troy and Renssalaer, as well and Poughkeepsie and Columbia County’s liberals, this is a leaning Democratic district.

18.  Hinchey loses his tendril into Binghamton and goes north and south.  He picks up Delaware, Greene, and part of Albany to the north and more of Orange to the south.  He keeps his core, and therefore I think, although this is pretty even, I believe Hinchey will win this.  This squarely becomes a Catskills district.



Easy to describe.  from districts 4-17, all go strongly Dem. but two.  Grimm’s Richmond-Southwest Brooklyn district packs a bunch of Republicans together, and so this is strongly Republican.  District 7 strikes me as even.  14-15 are Hispanic majority, 8 is Hispanic plurality.  Districts 9-10 are African American majority and 6 is African-American plurality.  These two pluralities are over 40%.  District 5 is 40% white.

District 17 puts Lowey and Hayworth together, but this is easily Lowey’s

I did not intend to redistrict any of the following representatives into a contest with another:

16: Engel

15: Serrano

14: Rangel

13: Maloney

12: Nadler

11: Grimm (Stron Republican)

10: Towns

09: Clark

08: Velazquez

07: Weiner (but could swing)

06: Meeks

05: Crowley

I did put McCarthy and Ackerman in district 4.

Long Island’s voter populations are split evenly, but I think NY-03 will go to King, NY-02 will go to Israel, and NY-01 is truly even.

So, quick synopsis in case you’ve come down here and lost count:

19 Dem, 4 Rep., 3 Swing.  Are these numbers off?

NH-02: Annie Kuster Gearing up for a Rematch

This is very, very good news from Democrat Ann McLane Kuster (best known as Annie) – as long as you aren’t named Charlie Bass:

To fight for good jobs, to protect the fragile economic recovery, and to invest in strengthening our country’s future, this week I am taking the first steps to begin a campaign for U.S. Congress in 2012.

I’ll make a more formal announcement next year, but I’m not willing to sit on the sidelines until then – I’m going to roll up my sleeves and start working today.

Kuster suffered one of the most heart-breaking defeats last year, losing to Bass by just 1.6%. (In fact, this was the second-closest open seat loss in the nation for Dems, after WV-01.) The strength of the GOP tide in the rest of the state last year shows just how weak a candidate Bass really is – and how strong a campaign Kuster ran. So I’m really excited that she’ll be getting back in the game (and hopefully, she won’t have to face another primary from the likes of DLCer Katrina Swett). I’m also pleased to see that Kuster has every intention of sticking to a strong progressive message. From the same announcement:

I am a frugal Yankee and I believe we need to cut wasteful government spending – like the billions in subsidies for oil companies, the corporate tax breaks for moving jobs overseas, and the billions more spent on redundant weapons systems that our military leaders have identified as wasteful and unneeded. But instead of these cuts, the US House of Representatives is cutting what we need most: education, public safety, and the clean energy research that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It makes no sense.

More like this, please.