Arizona is gaining one seat, from eight up to nine, and that means that its new target is 710,224, up from 641K in 2000. Interestingly, despite the fact that it’s gaining a new seat, there are still three currently-composed districts that are in a deficit and need to pick up people from elsewhere: the 3rd, 4th, and 5th. These are the three central districts in the Phoenix area that are essentially built out and can’t expand in any direction (except up); meanwhile, the 2nd, 6th, and 7th can continue to expand every which way into the desert, which is precisely what they did over the decade, so look for one additional GOP-friendly seat to be carved out of Phoenix’s endless suburbia (although whether it’s centered in Phoenix’s west or east suburbs remains to be seen… between the commission’s role in deciding, and possible multiple incumbents opening up seats to run for the Senate, there really aren’t any clues what will happen).
Like the other border states, Arizona has become signficantly more Hispanic over the decade, up to 29.6% Hispanic now compared with 25.3% in 2000. The Hispanic growth wasn’t concentrated any one particular place: that 4% increase was closely mirrored in all the districts. The 2nd had the biggest Hispanic shift, at 7% (from 14% to 21%), while the 1st had the smallest shift, at 3% (from 16% to 19%). That dissipation of the Hispanic vote means that it’s not terribly likely that a third VRA seat will be carved out, despite the fact that Hispanics are close to 1/3 of the state’s population.
| District | Population | Deviation |
|---|---|---|
| AZ-01 | 774,310 | 64,086 |
| AZ-02 | 972,839 | 262,615 |
| AZ-03 | 707,919 | (2,305) |
| AZ-04 | 698,314 | (11,910) |
| AZ-05 | 656,833 | (53,391) |
| AZ-06 | 971,733 | 261,509 |
| AZ-07 | 855,769 | 145,545 |
| AZ-08 | 754,300 | 44,076 |
| Total: | 6,392,017 |
I’m not the first one to observe that Idaho redistricting is pretty much drama-free. Nevertheless, there’s at least something interesting going on here in this small but fast-growing state: growth is very heavily concentrated in suburbs and exurbs west of Boise. For instance, the state’s 2nd and 3rd biggest cities used to be Pocatello and Idaho Falls; now they’re Meridian (a large suburb west of Boise) and Nampa (in Canyon County, the next county to the west). That means that the districts are kind of lopsided, and it looks like much of Boise proper, currently split down the middle, will wind up being given to ID-02. While Boise is certainly the most urbane part of the state, and it should tip the balance a bit in the blue direction (as for the past decade, the two districts have had almost identical PVIs), the 2nd should still be a long way away from somewhere the Dems can compete. (Idaho’s target is 783,791, up from 646K in 2000. Look for it to get a 3rd seat in 2020.)
| District | Population | Deviation |
|---|---|---|
| ID-01 | 841,930 | 58,139 |
| ID-02 | 725,652 | (58,139) |
| Total: | 1,567,582 |
Wisconsin held steady at eight seats this year, and even its districts held pretty steady, too. Its target is 710,873, up from 670K in 2000. That means the only district that lost population is the Milwaukee-based 4th and even it only lost a few thousand since 2000. The main area of growth is the state’s other blue stronghold, the Madison-area 2nd (must have something to do with THE BLOATED STATE GOVERNMENT AND THOSE GREEDY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES MULTIPLYING LIKE LOCUSTS!!!!1!!), which needs to give about 40,000 people to the 4th (although they’ll have to pass through the suburban 5th, which sits smack dab between them). Also, it looks like Dairyland is gaining a little at the expense of the North Woods, as the 3rd will need to pick up 20K from GOP freshman Sean Duffy’s 7th. Although the GOP controls the redistricting process here, thanks to their House gains in 2010 and the overall uniform swinginess of the rural counties, they’re probably just going to be playing defense with their map.
| District | Population | Deviation |
|---|---|---|
| WI-01 | 728,042 | 17,169 |
| WI-02 | 751,169 | 40,296 |
| WI-03 | 729,957 | 19,084 |
| WI-04 | 669,015 | (41,858) |
| WI-05 | 707,580 | (3,293) |
| WI-06 | 705,102 | (5,771) |
| WI-07 | 689,279 | (21,594) |
| WI-08 | 706,840 | (4,033) |
| Total: | 5,686,986 |
Just seems werid they would be identical +/-.
Interesting, the estimates I was working with earlier had Flake’s AZ6 a fair amount ahead of Franks’ AZ2. Looks like there was a little more growth in the west valley and a little less on the east side. Between those two and Grijalva’s AZ7, you have nearly enough excess to make a full “east-west” district in the southern exurbs without mangling any of the current districts too much. When I did this with the old data the new district was heavily Hispanic and probably tilt-D or lean-D overall.
When I put the new district entirely in the west valley, the most straightforward (compact districts, etc) map I could draw was a disaster for Republicans, so I would not expect that to happen. When I put it in the east valley the new district was very red, and the overall result was more neutral.
May also be St. Criox County which is an exurb of the Twin Cities area. The growth there has been so strong that it’s filtering into Wisconsin too.
How friendly to the Republicans do you expect this new district in Arizona to be?
Also, despite the growth not being concentrated to give the Democrats an overwhelming advantage in any particular seat(s), I’m not sure that’s a bad thing. Those who are more familiar with the map can tell me if I am wrong, but if it’s expanding as quickly as it is and shows no serious signs of slowing down, and if the Democrats continue to benefit from the Hispanic vote, it’s going to make all districts more competitive. That won’t necessarily mean much of anything in some districts, of course, since an R+10 district is just as Republican in practice as an R+13 district, but as long as Democrats are being drawn out at a disadvantage, they could compete in more places.
would have to absorb some of the most Republican areas of ID-1 in Ada County. Contrary to popular belief, Ada County isn’t just one large moderate pool of voters. It’s extremely, extremely polarized. The north end of Boise as whole voted 60% for Allred and he was a really weak candidate for Boise. Otter struggled to get into the mid 30s. Meanwhile Meridian, outer Boise and Eagle posted up gigantic margins in favor of Otter with him garnering nearly 70% of the vote.
There are only two Democratic precincts for ID-2 to absorb, more likely the population shift is only going to make ID-2 more of a GOP stronghold.
Not that there was much that they could do to his district anyway, but it’s good they don’t have room to play around. Duffy will get some assistant, but he’ll still have a marginal and have to work hard.
That the much-worried-about discrepency between Arizona’s 2009 population estimates and the actual census results doesn’t look like as much a result of a Hispanic undercount. Perhaps the was more general problem with the population model the census used in deriving estimates for Arizona, but either way, these district sizes look more or less like we expected, just slightly less populous. If AZ-04 had turned out to be the smallest district and AZ-07 had only been in the middle of the pack, I would have been more worried.
The Census Bureau grossly overestimated the population of Arizona (along with Georgia), and I was not surprised to see this was the case at the municipal level, too, with them estimating Phoenix to have grown nearly 25% over the decade, and really only growing 9.4%, and nearby mega-suburb Mesa only growing by about 11%.
I wonder if the some Republicans in the WI Legislature will actually get recalled; maybe the Dems could take control of one of the chambers before redistricting….
The name and party ID of the current seat holder i.e.
Current Rep District Population Deviation
Bishop D NY-01 728,042 17,169