Outlook for the California State Legislature in 2010 – May 2010 Edition

While the range of competitive House districts has narrowed considerably, I am still including all 8 Obama-Republican districts to watch their trends. I also added state legislative seats that are open this year in which the incumbent is not term-limited.

Cross-posted at Calitics and Democracy for California.

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
CA-03
Dan Lungren
38.41%
39.15%
R+0.74
O+0.5
CA-24
Elton Gallegly
35.72%
41.46%
R+5.74
O+2.8
CA-25
Buck McKeon
37.39%
39.42%
R+2.03
O+1.1
CA-26
David Dreier
35.55%
40.13%
R+4.58
O+4.0
CA-44
Ken Calvert
34.33%
42.75%
R+8.42
O+0.9
CA-45
Mary Bono Mack
37.76%
41.55%
R+3.79
O+4.6
CA-48
John Campbell
29.25%
44.44%
R+15.19
O+0.7
CA-50
Brian Bilbray
31.49%
40.23%
R+8.74
O+4.2

Competitive and/or open state legislature districts are over the flip…

Our current numbers in the Senate are 25 Democrats/14 Republicans/1 Vacant, with winning 2 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3; and in the Assembly 49 Democrats/29 Republicans/1 Independent (who is term-limited)/1 Vacant (Dem seat which will be filled before Election Day), with winning 3 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3. Incumbents running for reelection are italicized.

SENATE

Republicans (6)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
SD-04
Sam Aanestad
32.57%
43.77%
R+12.20
M+11.8
SD-12
Jeff Denham
49.85%
31.47%
D+18.38
O+17.6
SD-14
Dave Cogdill
34.06%
46.91%
R+12.85
M+13.2
SD-15
Vacant
40.78%
34.50%
D+6.28
O+20.3
SD-18
Roy Ashburn
31.63%
47.31%
R+15.68
M+23.1
SD-36
Dennis Hollingsworth
29.03%
45.81%
R+16.78
M+14.2

Democrats (6)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
SD-02
Pat Wiggins
49.76%
24.40%
D+15.36
O+39.9
SD-16
Dean Florez
50.63%
31.84%
D+18.79
O+19.5
SD-22
Gilbert Cedillo
58.58%
14.61%
D+43.97
O+58.7
SD-24
Gloria Romero
53.17%
21.13%
D+32.04
O+41.3
SD-34
Lou Correa
44.25%
32.73%
D+11.52
O+16.8
SD-40
Denise Ducheny
46.63%
28.91%
D+17.72
O+25.7

ASSEMBLY

Republicans (19)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
AD-03
Dan Logue
34.34%
39.78%
R+5.44
M+1.6
AD-05
Roger Niello
38.81%
38.30%
D+0.51
O+4.2
AD-25
Tom Berryhill
37.51%
41.42%
R+3.91
M+7.9
AD-26
Bill Berryhill
42.71%
38.57%
D+4.14
O+4.4
AD-30
Danny Gilmore
45.87%
36.18%
D+9.69
O+3.9
AD-32
Jean Fuller
31.06%
48.95%
R+17.89
M+26.7
AD-33
Sam Blakeslee
35.70%
40.74%
R+5.04
O+1.4
AD-36
Steve Knight
38.95%
39.07%
R+0.12
O+0.8
AD-37
Audra Strickland
35.81%
40.97%
R+5.16
O+3.7
AD-38
Cameron Smyth
36.77%
39.51%
R+2.74
O+4.9
AD-59
Anthony Adams
34.63%
42.93%
R+8.30
M+4.8
AD-63
Bill Emmerson
37.87%
40.10%
R+2.23
O+4.1
AD-64
Brian Nestande
35.68%
42.24%
R+5.56
O+1.8
AD-65
Paul Cook
36.62%
41.44%
R+4.82
M+4.1
AD-68
Van Tran
32.67%
40.91%
R+8.24
M+2.9
AD-70
Chuck DeVore
30.02%
42.99%
R+12.97
O+3.9
AD-74
Martin Garrick
30.98%
41.60%
R+10.62
O+2.2
AD-75
Nathan Fletcher
30.87%
39.84%
R+8.97
O+4.1
AD-77
Joel Anderson
30.92%
43.75%
R+12.83
M+13.0

Democrats (19)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
AD-07
Noreen Evans
52.75%
23.42%
D+29.33
O+43.3
AD-09
Dave Jones
55.94%
19.80%
D+36.14
O+49.0
AD-10
Alyson Huber
39.97%
39.03%
D+0.94
O+4.0
AD-11
Tom Torlakson
53.91%
21.78%
D+32.13
O+41.2
AD-15
Joan Buchanan
40.65%
35.65%
D+5.00
O+16.9
AD-20
Alberto Torrico
48.63%
19.89%
D+28.74
O+42.3
AD-21
Ira Ruskin
47.55%
26.25%
D+21.30
O+45.8
AD-23
Joe Coto
51.34%
18.69%
D+32.65
O+44.4
AD-28
Anna Caballero
55.39%
23.31%
D+32.08
O+38.3
AD-31
Juan Arambula
50.88%
32.08%
D+18.80
O+26.1
AD-35
Pedro Nava
47.79%
27.96%
D+19.83
O+35.6
AD-45
Kevin de León
58.83%
12.84%
D+45.99
O+63.6
AD-47
Karen Bass
64.73%
11.20%
D+53.53
O+71.9
AD-50
Hector De La Torre
61.48%
16.40%
D+45.08
O+55.9
AD-57
Ed Hernandez
51.14%
25.19%
D+25.95
O+34.4
AD-76
Lori Saldaña
42.24%
26.81%
D+15.43
O+34.4
AD-78
Martin Block
43.52%
30.78%
D+12.74
O+21.8
AD-79
Mary Salas
48.47%
23.91%
D+24.56
O+31.6
AD-80
Manuel Perez
45.41%
35.39%
D+10.02
O+20.7

Outlook for the California State Legislature in 2010 – Post-Filing Deadline Edition

With the filing deadline passed, we are beginning to see how the fields are shaping up for the 2010 elections in California. While the range of competitive House districts has narrowed considerably, I am still including all 8 Obama-Republican districts to watch their trends.

Cross-posted at Calitics and Democracy for California.

Breaking news: We now have a registration advantage in Assembly District 5 and are closing in on CA-03!

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
CA-03
Dan Lungren
38.46%
39.04%
R+0.58
O+0.5
CA-24
Elton Gallegly
35.78%
41.53%
R+5.75
O+2.8
CA-25
Buck McKeon
37.42%
39.58%
R+2.16
O+1.1
CA-26
David Dreier
35.64%
40.15%
R+4.51
O+4.0
CA-44
Ken Calvert
34.67%
42.47%
R+7.80
O+0.9
CA-45
Mary Bono Mack
38.02%
41.50%
R+3.48
O+4.6
CA-48
John Campbell
29.36%
44.36%
R+15.00
O+0.7
CA-50
Brian Bilbray
31.33%
39.91%
R+8.58
O+4.2

Competitive and/or open state legislature districts are over the flip…

Our current numbers in the Senate are 25 Democrats/15 Republicans, with winning 2 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3; and in the Assembly 49 Democrats/29 Republicans/1 Independent (who is term-limited)/1 Vacant (Dem seat which will be filled before Election Day), with winning 3 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3.

SENATE

Republicans (4)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
SD-04
Sam Aanestad
32.78%
43.83%
R+11.05
M+11.8
SD-12
Jeff Denham
49.13%
32.03%
D+17.10
O+17.6
SD-18
Roy Ashburn
31.76%
47.36%
R+15.60
M+23.1
SD-36
Dennis Hollingsworth
28.97%
45.60%
R+16.63
M+14.2

Democrats (5)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
SD-16
Dean Florez
50.41%
32.00%
D+18.41
O+19.5
SD-22
Gilbert Cedillo
58.91%
14.39%
D+43.52
O+58.7
SD-24
Gloria Romero
53.53%
20.72%
D+32.81
O+41.3
SD-34
Lou Correa
44.22%
32.49%
D+11.73
O+16.8
SD-40
Denise Ducheny
46.47%
28.84%
D+17.63
O+25.7

ASSEMBLY

Republicans (16)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
AD-03
Dan Logue
34.52%
39.91%
R+5.39
M+1.6
AD-05
Roger Niello
38.97%
38.05%
D+0.92
O+4.2
AD-25
Tom Berryhill
37.35%
41.70%
R+4.35
M+7.9
AD-26
Bill Berryhill
42.35%
38.88%
D+3.47
O+4.4
AD-30
Danny Gilmore
46.12%
36.12%
D+10.00
O+3.9
AD-33
Sam Blakeslee
35.89%
40.47%
R+4.58
O+1.4
AD-36
Steve Knight
38.92%
39.29%
R+0.37
O+0.8
AD-37
Audra Strickland
35.87%
41.04%
R+5.17
O+3.7
AD-38
Cameron Smyth
36.83%
39.62%
R+2.79
O+4.9
AD-63
Bill Emmerson
37.96%
40.01%
R+2.05
O+4.1
AD-64
Brian Nestande
36.08%
41.95%
R+5.87
O+1.8
AD-65
Paul Cook
36.91%
41.29%
R+4.38
M+4.1
AD-68
Van Tran
32.78%
40.78%
R+8.00
M+2.9
AD-70
Chuck DeVore
30.12%
42.93%
R+12.81
O+3.9
AD-74
Martin Garrick
30.88%
41.17%
R+10.29
O+2.2
AD-75
Nathan Fletcher
30.64%
39.58%
R+8.94
O+4.1

Democrats (15)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
AD-07
Noreen Evans
52.94%
23.47%
D+29.47
O+43.3
AD-09
Dave Jones
56.92%
18.55%
D+38.37
O+49.0
AD-10
Alyson Huber
39.41%
39.18%
D+0.23
O+4.0
AD-15
Joan Buchanan
40.65%
35.70%
D+4.95
O+16.9
AD-20
Alberto Torrico
48.74%
19.90%
D+28.84
O+42.3
AD-21
Ira Ruskin
47.61%
26.40%
D+21.21
O+45.8
AD-23
Joe Coto
51.59%
18.60%
D+32.99
O+44.4
AD-31
Juan Arambula
50.40%
32.35%
D+18.05
O+26.1
AD-35
Pedro Nava
48.03%
27.56%
D+20.47
O+35.6
AD-47
Karen Bass
64.89%
11.14%
D+53.75
O+71.9
AD-50
Hector De La Torre
61.99%
15.82%
D+46.17
O+55.9
AD-76
Lori Saldaña
41.94%
26.52%
D+15.42
O+34.4
AD-78
Martin Block
42.97%
30.97%
D+12.00
O+21.8
AD-80
Manuel Perez
45.74%
35.25%
D+10.49
O+20.7

House 2010 Midterms – More than just defense.

Whilst the Massachusetts Senate Special and a series of dodgy house polls have Democrats convinced that the November midterms will be apocalyptic; the fact is that a number of Republican held House districts are in fact vulnerable to a takeover from Democratic challengers.

How many?

Below the fold for all the details and hey go check out the 2010 Race Tracker Wiki over at Open Congress for all your House, Senate and Gubernatorial needs.

***This diary should be read in conjunction with the diary by Silver Spring***

There are 5 groups of races that are or might become or potentially should be competitive in November. They include Obama Republican districts, districts with very good candidates and districts of a Republican PVI of R+4 and less.

The first ten races below are ranked in order of probability of takeover. These races WILL be competitive in November.

1. DE-AL (Castle) – D+7,

Stick a fork in this one it is done.

With Castle running for the Senate does anyone really think there is a Republican in Delaware who can hold this district for the GOP? Especially as the Democratic Party currently leads in voter reg – 288,380 to 180,620.

With Carney sitting on a 100/1 Cash on hand advantage as at the end of December and the only poll available showing Carney with a 23 point lead this 62% Obama district is certain to end up in the Democratic column in November.

2. LA-02 (Cao) – D+25,

Incumbent GOP Rep Anh Cao has one thing and one thing alone going for him – a Cash on Hand advantage of $91K as at the end of December – $316K-$225K.

Every other indicator tells us that presumptive Democratic nominee State Rep Cedric Richmond will steamroll his way through this race in November.

After all Obama got no less than 75% of the vote in this D+25 district. Also there are 237,103 registered Democrats and only 39,753 registered Republicans. And lastly of course, we can all remember how Cao only won in 2008 courtesy of an awfully corrupt Democratic incumbent – Bill Jefferson.

Cao is toast.

3. IL-10 (Kirk) – D+6,

With Republican Dold and Democrat Seals emerging from competitive primaries this open District race is definitely on the radar for 2010.

Dold leads in COH $198K/$145K (as at 13th January) but Seals has the rolodex to crank up the fundraising on his 3rd attempt at the district, particularly if supporters of his vanquished primary opponent – Julie Hamos – circle the wagons and pitch in (she did raise over $1 mill). To this point Seals has outraised Dold too.

Seals will win here for two interlinked reasons:

1) Obama got 61% of the vote here in 2008.

2) Dold is just not moderate enough to attract crossover votes the way Mark Kirk did.

– I should note I volunteered for Seals in 2008 and am ridiculously biased.

4. PA-06 (Gerlach) – D+4,

With Gerlach back in the race (but flat broke (and his aborted Gubernatorial race was flat broke too at the end) this one will be the focus of much attention.

Presumptive nominee Doug Pike has more than $1 Mill COH as at 31st December, although it is largely self funded. BTW at this stage in 2008 Gerlach had raised almost $1.5 mill and still almost lost 52%/48% over a 2nd tier candidate.

This D+4, 58% Obama district (that also voted for Kerry like all of my top 6 races) is at worst a 50/50 pick up chance.

5. PA-15 (Dent) – D+2,

For the first time Dent has a serious top tier opponent. Having dispatched a serious of 2nd tier candidates Dent is in for the race of his life in 2010. Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan seems to be the real deal. As well as already being a public official Callahan has in the last quarter outraised Dent and they are basically equal in  

COH.

Dent must be worried as his campaign released a very dodgy internal poll showing him leading 58%/27% but refused to release the internals to go with it (a sure sign of bodgy polling)as is the claimed Obama approval rating of 41% compared to a Pennsylvania wide 57% (According to Gallup). Obama won this district in 2008 56%/43%.

Callahan has a shot here. Either way it will be competitive.

6. WA-08 (Reichert) – D+3,

Washingtons’ 8th congressional district is one of a handful that are on the perennial target list for Democrats that we didn’t win in 2006 or 2008. Will 2010 be the year? Yeh quite possibly.

Obama carried this one 56%/42% in 2008 whilst Reichert was held to 52.78% by Darcy Burner.

So far so good.

As at the end of December Democrat Delbene led the COH race $773,327/$477,149 and had raised to that point $1,047,873 to Reicherts’$985,665. Whilst almost half of Delbenes’ total came from a loan from herself to the campaign she has shown herself to be adept at fundraising from others. Yep we have a self funder who can also fundraise.

Watch this one on election night – very closely.  

7. CA-03 (Lundgren) – R+6,

Well whoever would have thunk it; CA-03 as a competitive race!

Democrat Amri has just come off a $249K fundraising quarter and has more COH than  Republican Lungren ($739K/$526K), who only raised $138K. At this point in the cycle Amri has outraised Lungren as well ($871K/$732K).

Add to this the facts that Obama won the district 49.3%/48.8%, Lungren only won in 2008 by 49.49%/43.93% and the voter registration advantage for the GOP has decreased from 6.6% in 2006 to near parity (38.46%/39.04%)as of the start of 2010 and we have a race on our hands.

This one will be very interesting come November.

8. NE-02 (Terry) – R+6,

Yep hard to believe that a congressional district in Nebraska could be competitive but the 2nd shall be so. Remember that Obama carried this Omaha based district 50%/49% and the makings are there for a good race. State Senator Tom White is quite an adept fundraiser for a challenger too. After a 180K December quarter he has $343K COH compared to incumbent Republican Terry’s $543K COH. Given that challengers rarely lead the COH chase this one is set for a great race in November.

9. SC-02 (Wilson) – R+9,

SC-02 will be know as the 2010 Moneybomb District! Why? because at the end of December incumbent Republican Joe “you lie” Wilson and his Democratic challenger Robert Miller have raised a breathtaking $5.5 Million between them. Wilson has $2,341,915 COH and Miller has $1,678,436 COH! To be honest Millers’ COH should by itself make this one competive.

However when you consider that Wilson was held to 53.74% in 2008 and that whilst McCain won easily 54%/45%, that is only 1% better than the neighbouring 5th, held by Democrat John Spratt and you have a barn burner in the making.

This race will be fascinating on election night – no doubt about it!

10. KS-04 (Tiahrt) – R+14,

Despite its’ heavily Republican nature (McCain won here 58%/40%) this race will be competitive in November – absolutely.

Democrat Goyle is fundraising up a storm having raised $656K as at the end of December. His closest rival – Republican Pompeo – has only raised $429K. Last quarter Goyle managed a staggering (for a Kansas Democrat) $253K for the quarter and currently has $583K COH; a fair effort to say the least. Pompeo meanwhile managed only $78K for a COH total of $318K. Republican Kelsey FWIW, despite an impressive 233K quarter, has only $40K COH!

Love to see a poll here but definitely one to watch on election night.

This second group of Districts are likely to be competitive in November but are not there yet:

AL-03 (Rogers) – R+9,

Democrat Joshua Segall had a $100K December quarter and is behind in COH by only $216K/$392K.

He ran in 2008 and kept Rogers to 46%/54% as McCain carried the District 56%/43%.

Not a friendly district for Democrats but if Segall can file some 6 figure fundraising quarters then this race could well be up there in November.

CA-45 (Bono Mack) – R+3,

Democratic candidate (and Palm Springs Mayor) Stephen Pougnet is on the cusp of a very competitive challenge to GOP incumbent Mary Bono Mack – finally a top tier candidate here.

Obama carried this district 51.5%/46.9% and the GOP registration gap has shrunk from 10% to 3.48% between 2006 and the start of this year – 38.02%/41.50% currently.

The only fly in the ointment (apart from the national political environment!) is of course fundraising. Whilst Pougnet has outraised Bono Mack in two of the last three quarters and has slightly then than half as much COH as her $402K/$893K his COH actually went backwards by 10K last quarter despite a $150K quarter. Pougnet just needs a good solid $200K March Quarter IMHO to cash him up for the stretch and make this race definitely competitive.  

FL-25 (Diaz-Balart OPEN) – R+5,

With Mario Diaz-Balart bolting to run in the 21st to replace his retiring brother Lincoln this race will be one to watch.

McCain carried this one 50%/49% whilst Diaz-Balart was held to 53%. The Republican Voter registration advantage is only 3364; 137,913/134,549 as at the 2008 election. This is down from 21818 at the 21006 midterms.

Diaz-Balart had only $178K COH as at the end of December too BTW. Expect a top tier Dem to jump in here, maybe 2006 nominee Joe Garcia, and at that point this one should become competitive. The only Democrat currently running, Luis Rivera has yet to file a fundraising report having jumped in only a month or so ago.

MN-03 (Paulsen) – R+0,

Despite missing out on our preferred candidate State Sen Terri Bonoff there is every chance that this district that Obama carried 52%/46% in 2008 will be competitive. Democratic presumptive nominee Maureen Hackett only got into the race in October and self funded $103K of her $138K quarter ($129K COH). The March quarter will be telling but if as I suspect she has a really good go at fundraising up a storm this one will be competitive. The cloud on the horizon, of course, is incumbent Republican Paulsens’ $943K COH!

MN-06 (Bachmann) – R+7,

As luck would have it we have two viable candidates in this district that McCain carried 53%/45%.

Maureen Reed has 388K COH after a $208K December quarter.

Tarryl Clark (who I think will be the nominee) has yep $388K COH after a $294K December quarter. These are great numbers for both candidates. The only reason this one isn’t yet on the competitive list is batshit crazy Michelle Bachmanns’ $1 million COH!

If either Democrat can manage another $250K March quarter then this race is on for young and old despite its’ Republican bent.

OH-12 (Tiberi) – D+1,

Democratic candidate Brooks has her work cut out running against incumbent Republican Tiberi. He and his $1.2 mill COH! And his $449K December quarter haul. Brooks must we wondering what more she needs to do after her 4th quarter haul of $231K, leaving her with $328K COH – a very respectable set of numbers. Will this district that Obama carried 54%/44% be competitive in November? Dunno – but another 200K quarter will at least make Brooks (already a top tier challenger) quite viable.

Time will tell.

The third group of Districts are those that may, but are unlikely, to become competitive:

CA-48 (Campbell) – R+6,

Obama won this district 49.5%/48.6% and the GOP voter reg advantage has declined from 22% to a still whopping 15% as at Jan 1. That stat and Republican Campbells’ $1.031M/$171K COH advantage over Democrat Krom makes it unlikely that this race will become competitive. But it may. After all Krom has raised $299K so far this cycle including a reasonable but not great $90K in the December quarter. Campbell’s $500K December quarter makes it very tough though.

CA-50 (Bilbray) – R+3,

A 60K odd December quarter does not a competitive race make, especially when the COH only increases by $10K!. Busby has been beaten twice before by the current incumbent, and unfortunately seems headed that way again. Working in her favor is the fact that Obama carried the district 51.3%/47.1% and the GOP voter reg advantage has declined from 14% in 2006 to 7.58% (39.91%/31.33%) as at the start of this year. However this will be a what might have been IMHO.

MN-02 (Kline) – R+4,

With former Democratic State Rep Shelley Madore only jumping in at the start of January this race has yet to solidify. On the down side is the fact that McCain carried this district 50%/48%. On the upside incumbent Republican Kline has (only!) $358K COH after a modest $152K December quarter.

Wait and see but it may be a bit late in the cycle for this one to fire up.

NJ-07 (Lance) – R+3,

Yet another district where the Democratic candidate (Potosnak) has only just got into the race so it may take some time for things to play out. Obama carried this district 50%/49% and Leonard has only $347K COH (not a lot for a congressional race in New Jersey) and raised only 60K in the December quarter. Interestingly enough the Democrats have a 16K voter registration advantage here as at November 2009 – 121,553/105,943.

TX-32 (Sessions) – R+8,

A $151K 4th quarter and $114K COH should be a promising start. Unless your opponent is the head of the NRCC and has $1.075 million COH. Oh dear.

Roggio seems to be quite a credible candidate but without a monster March quarter he just isn’t going to be in a position to be competitive in November.

McCain carried this district 53%/46% too btw – red but not ruby red.

And fourthly these districts have either 3rd tier candidates or candidates whose fundraising precludes a competitive race at this stage:

CA-24 (Gallegly) – R+4,

A 15K December quarter for leading Democrat Tim Allison means this one can’t be competitive; the resources simply aren’t there. This is all the more so given that Gallegly has $836K COH to Allison’s $35K . Pity because Obama carried this one 50.5%/47.7% and the GOP voter reg advantage has declined from 10% to 5.75% (41.53%/35.78%) between 2006 and the start of this year.

CA-25 (McKeon) – R+6,

Our candidate, 2008 nominee Jackie Conaway hasn’t even registered with the FEC – Game over.

Pity as Obama carried the district 49.4%/48.3% and the GOP voter reg advantage has declined to 2% over the last 3 years!

CA-26 (Dreier) – R+3,

2008 Democratic challenger Warner had a poor December quarter raising only 37K and his COH is only $123K compared to incumbent Republican Dreier’s $1.025 million! Obama won the district 51/47 and the GOP voter reg advantage has dropped from 11% to 4.5% as of the start of 2010.

Despite that the COH gap and Warners’ poor December fundraising means this one is unlikely to be competitive this November alas.

CA-44 (Calvert) – R+6,

Obama won this district 49.3%/48.6% and the GOP voter reg advantage has decreased from 15% in 2006 to 8% as at Jan 5th 2010. Competitive race right? Wrong. Democrat Hedrick who only lost in 2008 48.8/51.2 just can’t seem to crank up the fundraising. Having raised only 29K in the December quarter he now trails in the COH race $95K/$519K.

Such a shame.

FL-10 (Young) – R+1,

State Sen Charlie Justice – what a great name for a congressional candidate – is the best candidate that the Democrats have run against republican incumbent Bill Young in years and years. It is such a pity then that Justices’ fundraising is so poor – $59K last quarter and $91K COH.

This is a District that should be competitive; Obama carried it 52%/47% and the Repub voter reg advantage declined from 169,982/153,728 in 2006 to 170,749/164,400 in 2008.

Alas but for that poor fundraising.

FL-12 (Putnam OPEN) – R+6,

Democrat Lori Edwards won’t make this a competitive election with a $26K December quarter ($60K COH). This is all the more so given that presumptive Republican nominee Dennis Ross has $273K COH as at the end of December after an admittedly poor December quarter; raising only $76K himself.

This is a pity given that McCain only carried the District 50/49 and the Democratic voter reg advantage INCREASED from 2006 – 2008 from 153,189/166,794 to 164,780/192,958. WOW

As an open seat this one will almost certainly be a what might have been in November unless Edwards can seriously step up her fundraising.

FL-15 (Posey) – R+6,

The Democratic candidate Shannon Roberts has not filed a fundraising report despite filing to run over a year ago. Game over.

Pity as this 51%/48% McCain district, with it s’ repidly decreasing GOP voter reg advantage (189,872/158,363 – 2006 199,669/183,100 – 2008) should really have been competitive. Oh well.

IL-06 (Roskam) – R+0,

The race has not yet really taken shape in this district that Obama carried 56%/43%. Democratic challenger Ben Lowe filed for the race halfway through November and raised a scant $14K. Republican incumbent Roskam on the other hand after a $350K December quarter is sitting on $547K.

We really won’t know whether this will be competitive or not until after the March fundraising filings come in. I suspect it won’t as both parties will be focused on tussles in the 10th, 11th and 14th.

Maybe in 2012.

IL-13 (Biggert) – R+1,

2008 Democratic nominee Harper is back in 2010 in this district that Obama carried 54%/44%.

Unfortunately a $42K December quarter ($90K COH) does not cut the mustard against Republican incumbent Biggert who had a $142K December quarter ($637K COH).

Harper is a good, credible candidate who kept Biggert to 53% in 2008. Unless he has a monster March quarter this one just isn’t going to be competitive in November.

IL-16 (Manzullo) – R+2,

Whilst Obama carried this district 53%/46% this one only just scraped in as a potentially competitive race. And it won’t be with Democrat Gaulrapp raising a scant $14K ($7K COH) in the December quarter. Manzullo raised $150K ($355K COH) in the same period.

IA-04 (Latham) – R+0,

This race is really still just coming together. However that Democrat Maske managed to fundraise only $12K in the last 2 months of 2009 I think we can safely predict another cakewalk for Republican Latham in this district that Obama won 53%/46%. BTW as at Feb 1st the Democrats had a 8000 voter registration advantage 126503/118484.

MI-11 (McCotter) – R+0,

Incumbent Republican McCotter has been on Democratic target lists for years in this 54%/45% Obama district. He was even held to 51% in 2008. Despite this the Democrats have always failed to get a top tier opponent against him. Will 2010 be the year? It is hard to tell honestly but i doubt it. When Democrat Mosher declared at the start of 2009 she struck me (and the party) as being at best 2nd tier.

And this turns out to be the likely case with Mosher raising only $37K in the December quarter ($44K COH) compared to McCotters’ $118K December quarter ($579K) COH. Lets see what the March quarter reports bring but don’t hold your breath.

OH-14 (LaTourette) – R+3,

With McCain just shading Obama by less than 1% this District should be competitive. But it is unlikely. Whilst 2008 Democratic candidate O’Neill is back for another shot he did get thumped by alomost 20% in 2008. The other Democrat in the race – Greene – hasn’t even registered with the FEC to fundraise despite being in the race since November. Whilst LaTourette only has a modest $447K COH as at the end of November this race is highly unlikely to be a show stopper.

VA-10 (Wolf) – R+2,

Another perennial Democratic target sees no less than 4 Democrats running here in 2010. And it is no wonder as Obama carried the district 53%/46% and this part of Virginia is rapidly bluing. Incumbent Republican Wolf has nothing to fear here though, as none of his putative opponents have more than $6K COH as at the end of December compared to Wolfs’ $346K COH. A really disappointing miss for team blue.

WI-01 (Ryan) – R+2,

Democratic challenger Garin has $546 COH as at the end of December; incumbent Republican Ryan has $1.565 million. Game over in this 51%/47% Obama district.  

The last group of Districts are those that at this stage do not seem likely to competitive.

as we do not have declared Democratic candidates as yet!


FL-18 (Ros-Lehtinen) – R+3,

MI-04 (Camp) – R+3,

MI-06 (Upton) – R+0,

MI-08 (Rogers) – R+2,

NJ-02 (LoBiondo) – D+1,

NY-03 (King) – R+4,

VA-04 (Forbes) – R+4,

WI-06 (Petri) – R+4,

So in summary:

10 competitive races.

6 races that should become competitive.

5 races that may become competitive.

15 races that should be competitive but are highly unlikely to be so.

8 races that should be potentially become competitive but won’t be unless we find a candidate.

Not a particularly pretty scenario for Democrats but not nearly as terrible as the GOP and the traditional media would have you believe.

On to November!  

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

California Dreaming – 2010 House Races

With the midterms only 10 months away it is time now to cast our eyes over the biggest state in the country – California.

How will we fare in 2010?

Below the fold for all the details and hey go check out the 2010 Race Tracker Wiki over at Open Congress for all your House, Senate and Gubernatorial needs.

(Cross posted at Daily Kos, MyDD and Open Left)

All of the doom and gloom amongst naysayers about our chances in this years midterms simply does not tally when we drill down into race by race analysis in California.

For a start I think that all 34 Democratic incumbents are as safe as houses – yep including McNerney in the 11th and Sanchez in the 47th.

So what about all 19 Republican held districts?

Here we go:

CA-02 (Herger) – R+11,

Obama/McCain – 42.7/55

Kerry/Bush – 36.6/62

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 33.12/45.09

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 33.81/43.18

House result 2008 (D/R)- 42.1/57.9

Does anyone think we are going to win a R+11 district next year that we don’t already hold?

We don’t even have a candidate yet.

Enough said.

CA-03 (Lundgren) – R+6,

Obama/McCain – 49.2/48.7 (1592 Votes!)

Kerry/Bush – 40.8/58.2

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 36.14/42.70

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 37.73/39.58

House result 2008 (D/R)- 44/49.5

This one is definitely going to be competitive!

Bera led the COH race as at end of September 585K/446K – an impressive effort indeed. With all other Democratic candidates withdrawing and endorsing him and with a rapidly closing Voter reg gap this district will be the scene of a torrid race. Note also that Obama narrowly carried it.

CA-04 (McClintock) – R+10,

Obama/McCain – 43.9/54

Kerry/Bush – 37.4/61.3

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 30.28/47.86

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 31.14/45.83

House result 2008 (D/R)- 49.7/50.3

Does anyone think we are going to win a R+10 district next year that we don’t already hold? Especially as we don’t have a candidate yet and 2006/8 nominee Charlie Brown is definitely not running.

Enough said.

CA-19 (Radanovich OPEN) – R+9,

Obama/McCain – 46/52.1

Kerry/Bush – 37.9/61.1

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 36.09/46.73

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 37.19/43.62

House result 2008 (D/R)- Unopposed

Our candidates are seriously 2nd tier and need to step up massively if this is to be competitive. Do we have a State Rep who can run?

CA-21 (Nunes) – R+13,

Obama/McCain – 42.1/56.3

Kerry/Bush – 33.7/65.4

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 33.84/49.55

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 34.89/46.76

House result 2008 (D/R)- 31.6/68.4

Does anyone think we are going to win a R+13 district next year that we don’t already hold?

We don’t even have a candidate yet.

Enough said.

CA-22 (McCarthy) – R+16,

Obama/McCain – 38.3/59.7

Kerry/Bush – 31/67.9

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 30.06/51.21

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 31.29/48.31

House result 2008 (D/R)- Unopposed

Does anyone think we are going to win a R+16 district next year that we don’t already hold?

We don’t even have a candidate yet.

Enough said.

CA-24 (Gallegly) – R+4,

Obama/McCain – 50.5/47.7

Kerry/Bush – 43.1/55.7

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 34.15/44.12

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 35.83/41.82

House result 2008 (D/R)- 41.8/58.2

This one should be competitive but one of our candidates needs to put the foot down on the fundraising pedal. Is there a top tier candidate out there?

CA-25 (McKeon) – R+6,

Obama/McCain – 49.4/48.3

Kerry/Bush – 39.9/58.8

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 34.52/43.76

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 37.77/39.29

House result 2008 (D/R)- 42.2/57.8

This one too should be competitive but either Conaway fundraises like crazy or we get a better candidate.

CA-26 (Dreier) – R+3,

Obama/McCain – 51/47

Kerry/Bush – 43.7/55.1

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 33.54/44.42

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 35.67/40.50

House result 2008 (D/R)- 40.4/52.7

On paper this should be right up there but is Warner the guy to do it?

If so better start raising the dough.

CA-40 (Royce) – R+8,

Obama/McCain – 46.6/51.1

Kerry/Bush – 38.4/60.2

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 32.04/46.78

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 33.86/42.75

House result 2008 (D/R) – 37.4/62.6

No Candidate no chance. Simple really. Even with a good candidate it is a tough district.

CA-41 (Lewis) – R+10,

Obama/McCain – 43.7/54.2

Kerry/Bush – 36.9/61.8

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 32.18/47.80

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 34.12/44.20

House result 2008 (D/R)- 38.3/61.7

Does anyone think we are going to win a R+10 district next year that we don’t already hold? Only if Lewis bails out owing to ethical “issues”!

Enough said.

CA-42 (Miller) – R+10,

Obama/McCain – 44.9/53.2

Kerry/Bush – 36.9/62

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 28.88/49.79

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 30.56/46.16

House result 2008 (D/R)- 39.8/60.2

Does anyone think we are going to win a R+10 district next year that we don’t already hold?

Enough said.

CA-44 (Calvert) – R+6,

Obama/McCain – 49.5/48.6 (2532 Votes)

Kerry/Bush – 39.9/59

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 31.98/46.89

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 34.63/46.40

House result 2008 (D/R)- 48.8/51.2

Simple equation here. We have the candidate in Hedrick. If he can lift his fundraising game he may make a real of this. Remember he was the guy who delivered that 2008 result above.

CA-45 (Bono Mack) – R+3,

Obama/McCain – 51.5/46.9

Kerry/Bush – 43.1/56

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 35.85/45.53

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 37.81/42.08

House result 2008 (D/R)- 41.7/58.3

Pougnet is the mayor of Palm Springs and this will be a zinger IMHO. His fundraising is going well (347K COH as at end of September) and he obviously has a very high local profile.

CA-46 (Rohrabacher) – R+6,

Obama/McCain – 47.9/49.8

Kerry/Bush – 41.6/56.9

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 30.49/46.84

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 32.02/43.49

House result 2008 (D/R)- 43.1/52.6

No candidate presently this one is at best a long shot.

CA-48 (Campbell) – R+6,

Obama/McCain – 49.3/48.6 (2479 Votes)

Kerry/Bush – 40.4/58.3

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 27.13/49.32

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 29.40/44.77

House result 2008 (D/R)- 40.6/55.7

An intriguing district. Terribly low % of registered Dems and yet Obama won the district. Krom needs to put the foot down with her fundraising (126K COH as at end of September is not great) to make this an outside chance.

CA-49 (Issa) – R+10,

Obama/McCain – 45.1/53

Kerry/Bush – 36.5/62.5

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 28.50/47.96

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 30.94/43.86

House result 2008 (D/R)- 37.5/58.3

Does anyone think we are going to win a R+10 district next year that we don’t already hold?

Enough said.

CA-50 (Bilbray) – R+3,

Obama/McCain – 51.3/47.1

Kerry/Bush – 43.9/55.2

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 29.62/43.64

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 31.40/40.27

House result 2008 (D/R)- 45.2/50.3

We lost our best candidate here (Roberts), Busby is I think flawed and Emblem has yet to make a splash. And yet Obama won the district.

Either Emblem steps up her fundraising or we get a better candidate IMHO.

CA-52 (Hunter) – R+9,

Obama/McCain – 45/53.4

Kerry/Bush – 37.7/61.4

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2006 – 29.87/45.66

Voter Reg (D/R)- 10/2009 – 31.41/42.90

House result 2008 (D/R)- 39/56.4

Does anyone think we are going to win a R+9 district next year that we don’t already hold?

We don’t even have a candidate yet.

Enough said.

So in summary:

Competitive race:

CA-03, CA-45

Competitive if fundraising steps up:

CA-44, CA-48

A chance if the candidate steps up their fundraising or we find a more viable candidate:

CA-24, CA-25, CA-26, CA-50

Long shot:

CA-19, CA-40, CA-46

Forget it:

CA-02, CA-04, CA-21, CA-22, CA-41, CA-42, CA-49, CA-52.

Not bad 2 definitely competitive races and two more that could become so if our candidates step up the fundraising. Another 4 as well that could be competitive in the right circumstances. Not bad in an environment that is supposedly toxic for Democrats.

A last word also on the two supposedly vulnerable Democratic Districts:

CA-11 (McNerney) – R+1,

The GOP lost their best candidate when Del Arroz withdrew. If presumptive frontrunner Grape Grower Brad Goehring makes it out of the torrid Primary (7 candidates and counting) he will still remain a 2nd tier candidate, albeit one that can self fund. McNerney will be waiting with his 675K COH as at end of September. Following from an 11 point victory last year and near parity in voter reg (in 2006 there was a 5% GOP edge) McNerney will be just fine.

CA-47 (Sanchez) – D+4,

Does anybody really think that a D+4 District is going to flip in California next year? The Tran/Pham GOP Primary promises to be a zinger and the winner gets to take on an incumbent who got 69% of the vote last year and has 769K COH as at the end of September as well as a 12% party reg gap.

This one ain’t gonna flip.

What say you?

Redistricting California 2010, v2.0: Let Only 6 Republicans Be Safe

Taking into account some suggestions and comments, I made some changes to my previous attempt at redistricting California. I conceded an additional 2 seats to the GOP, which concomitantly makes a number of other seats more strongly Democratic. The additional 2 safe GOP seats are CA-4 and CA-48. Here’s what version 2 looks like, overall:

Statewide Map, Version 2

For comparison, here is Version 1:

Statewide Map, Version 1

Because redistricting diaries often seem to devolve into discussions of the morality of gerrymandering, I will state my thoughts up front in order to try and prevent discussion from thus devolving.

1) In an ideal world, my ideal scenario would be that all Congressional districts in all States would be redistricted by non-partisan commission, so that all districts were fair and no political party was disadvantaged on the national level.

2) We don’t live in an ideal world. If Democrats roll over and play dead during redistricting after the 2010 census, that will do nothing to stop Republicans from gerrymandering every last seat out of states they control, like Georgia, Texas, and Florida. That will result in a national Congressional map unfairly favorable towards Republicans.

3) So Democrats should draw politically favorable maps in states we control. Congressional Redistricting is a blood sport, and unilateral disarmament is not a viable solution. Taking the high road is the Michael Dukakis way, and it is the wrong way.

4) If Democrats draw strong enough maps in states like California that really hurt the GOP, then maybe the GOP will eventually cry uncle.

5) After that, maybe the GOP would agree to adopt a fair national solution in which all states, whether GOP controlled or Dem controlled, drew fair and competitive maps via commission or some other neutral mechanism. That might not happen, but electoral reform of that sort is certainly more likely if we fight back than if we let the GOP roll us.

Now, on to the substance:

Political Impact

The bottom line is that under this map or something similar, California’s Congressional delegation would have many more Democrats and many fewer Republicans. Overall there are now 42 seats classified as Safely Democratic, 4 Lean Democratic. Under this map California would likely send delegation with 46-49 Democrats and 6-9 Republicans to Congress. Currently, California’s Congressional delegation is 33D – 19R, so that is a substantial improvement.

If a handful of GOP incumbents are able to hold on in districts that voted in the mid-50s for Obama, it is possible the number of Democrats could be a bit lower than 46. But even in a very large GOP wave election, the number of Democratic seats would be unlikely to fall much below 42-46, because the vast majority of seats are at least D+10 or very close to it, which is more than high enough to withstand a 1994 or 2006 sized wave election.

Version 1 Change Version 2
Dem 39 +3 42
Lean Dem 5 -1 4
Swing 5 -2 3
GOP 4 +2 6

Below, I analyze the districts that change from my previous version.

Northern California

In Northern California, CA-4 is conceded to the GOP. In exchange CA-3 becomes more strongly Democratic and CA-10 much less gerrymandered. Indirectly, this also filters all the way down to San Bernadino County to help make CA-29 and CA-45 a bit more Democratic.

Northern California, Version 2 map

Districts Altered:


CA-2

Incumbent: ?Wally Herger? (R), ?Tom McClintock? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+11
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 39% Obama, R+14
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 40% Obama, R+13.
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 72% White
District 1.0 Demographics: 78% White
District 2.0 Demographics: 77% White

CA-2 shifts a bit northwards from version 1, getting rid of El Dorado and Amador Counties to move into Nevada County and take in more of the Sacramento suburbs in Placer County. This might make the district about 1 point more Democratic.


CA-3

Incumbent: Dan Lungren (R)
Previous District PVI: R+6
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 57% Obama, D+4
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 61% Obama, D+8
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 65% White
District 1.0 Demographics: 56% White
District version 2.0 Demographics: 45% White

CA-3 is reworked thoroughly from the previous version. In my previous version, GOP incumbent Dan Lungren was in trouble. In this new version, he is pretty much doomed if he runs in this district. Only 250,000 people in this district remain in Sacramento County, mostly in competitive northern suburbs, with a mix of Obama and McCain precincts. On top of those people, all of Solano County (except for a thin sparsely populated strip of CA-10) and West Sacramento are tacked on, turning a lean Democratic district into a solidly Democratic district.


CA-4

Incumbent: ?Dan Lungren? (R), ?George Radanovich? (R), ?Tom McLintock? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+10
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 53% Obama, D+0
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 41% Obama, R+12
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 79% White
District 1.0 Demographics: 57% White
District 2.0 Demographics: 78% White

The flip side of making CA-3 more Democratic is making CA-4 more Republican. The new CA-4 is a suburban swing district no more. It is now a solidly GOP district, combining suburban parts of Placer County with the Sierra Nevadas (minus Lake Tahoe) and strongly GOP north Fresno. 1/10 of the district is also made up of some particularly strong GOP precincts in Sacramento County, most of which are already in the current CA-4. GOP incumbents Dan Lungren, George Radanovich, and Tom McClintock would all have a reason to run here, making for a potential 3-way GOP primary, as substantial amounts of territory each has previously represented is included in this district.


CA-7

Incumbent: George Miller (D)
Previous District PVI: D+19
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 65% Obama, D+12
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 39% White, 27% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 50% White, 31% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 50% White, 28% Latino

CA-7 gives up Antioch in order to pick up Berkeley. In order to keep Richmond contiguous with Oakland while also enabling CA-7 to add Berkeley, there is a thin coastal strip of CA-9 running through Berkeley as well. George Miller should have no difficulties in Berkeley, and when Miller retires, another strong Democrat should do fine in this district as well. Disproportionately few votes in this district are actually cast in San Joaquin county due to the high Latino population there. So the potential problem of someone from Berkeley winning a Democratic primary but then losing a general election (which applied to my previous version of CA-10) ought to be reduced in this modified version of CA-7.




CA-10

Incumbent: John Garamendi (D)
Previous District PVI: D+11
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 64% Obama, D+11
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 56% White
New District Demographics: 46% White

CA-10 is not the monster that the previous district was. The entire Sierra Nevadas section of the district is gone in version 2, and that population is instead picked up in Sacramento County (which now makes up about 4/7 of the district). The Sacramento section looks on its face like it would be Republican because there are large swaths of rural areas in the south-east of the county. But actually most of the population is in relatively Democratic suburban areas (like Elk Grove), and CA-10’s section of Sacramento County voted similarly to the county as a whole. Berkeley is also traded to CA-7 in exchange for Antioch. That makes CA-10 a little less Democratic than it would be, but only by a few points because Antioch is pretty strongly Democratic as well (65% for Obama). This also has negates the chance that someone from Berkeley with limited appeal in the Sacramento suburbs will be a future Democratic nominee in CA-10.

Southern California

An additional district in Southern California is conceded to the GOP (CA-48), in exchange for strengthening a couple of relatively weak Swing/Lean Democratic districts, and reducing gerrymandering in Orange County.

Southern California, Version 2 map

South-East LA & Orange County, Version 2 map

Districts Altered




CA-22

Incumbent: ?Kevin McCarthy? (R), ?Devin Nunes? (R), ?George Radanovich? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+16
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 32% Obama, R+21
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 32% Obama, R+21
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 57% White, 49% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 62% White, 24% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 62% White, 26% Latino

Because CA-4 does not pick up the lake Tahoe area from CA-10, it has to make up population by pushing down on CA-22 into Fresno. This means that CA-22 also has some more population (114,000) to make up. It does so by crossing into San Bernadino County and relieving Adam Schiff of the most heavily Republican precincts around Barstow and Hesperia. So while the political makeup of CA-22 does not really change, it helps make CA-29 more Democratic, and indirectly helps to make CA-41 and CA-45 more Democratic.


CA-29

Incumbent: Adam Schiff (D)
Previous District PVI: D+14
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 61% Obama, D+8
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 42% White, 26% Asian, 26% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 46% White, 7% Asian, 33% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 45% White, 8% Asian, 34% Latino

As mentioned above, CA-29 sheds some heavily GOP areas to the 22nd district. To equalize the population, CA-29 adds Upland, which has some Democratic precincts to go with its Republican ones, and GOP Yucca Valley and Twenty Nine Palms. Though these areas are still generally GOP, they are a bit less Republican than the areas he loses. I also noticed that there were two prisons with combined populations of about 25,000 people in the middle of the desert/hills of rural San Bernadino county. I was sure to add those to CA-29, serving to increases the relative proportion of the vote cast in the heavily Democratic LA County part of the 29th. So Adam Schiff’s district becomes a bit more Democratic by picking up some relatively less GOP precincts and by adding some prisoners. I thought about putting Lake Tahoe in the 29th district, but didn’t in the end.




CA-40

Incumbent: ?Ed Royce? (R), ?John Campbell? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+8
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 52% Obama, R+1
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 57% Obama, D+4
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 42% White, 18% Asian, 34% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 43% White, 15% Asian, 35% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 46% White, 16% Asian, 32% Latino

CA-40 is now entirely within Orange County, and, like the rest of the districts in Orange County (except CA-47) is remodeled from version 1.0. This is probably just about the most Democratic district that can be made in Orange County without taking substantively from CA-47. It combines progressive and Democratic leaning Laguna beach with Costa Mesa, Irvine, and some Obama voting areas (with lots of apartments, which presumably explains their Democratic trend) around Laguna Woods/Aliso Viejo. This part of the district is 57% white, and makes up half of the district. The rest of the district (35% white) pecks around the fringes of CA-47, picking up Democratic leaning precincts in parts of Tustin, Anaheim, Fullerton, and Placentia. Effective mobilization of young and minority voters would be key to any potential pickup of this district for Democrats. Another note is that if the Asian American voters I picked up turn out to be disproportionately Vietnamese, that would also make this district marginally more Republican.




CA-41

Incumbent: Jerry Lewis (R)
Previous District PVI: R+10
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 53% Obama, D+0
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 58% Obama, D+5
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 55% White, 6% Black, 33% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 40% White, 11% Black, 39% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 33% White, 11% Black, 45% Latino

CA-41 becomes substantially more Republican and less white than the previous version. It gives up its more rural areas of San Bernadino County (and its prisons) and is pulled westward towards Los Angeles. As the white population declines and the Latino population increases, both Black and Latino voters become a substantially greater proportion of the electorate. Only 50,000 people in the district now live in non-urbanized areas now (in the mountains just to the East of San Bernadino). I would guess this district voted about 58% for Obama, though it is possible that it is even more Democratic than that. The city of San Bernadino, for example, voted 66% for Obama.




CA-43

Incumbent: Joe Baca (Blue Dog D)
Previous District PVI: D+13
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 17% White, 65% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 23% White, 62% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 22% White, 63% Latino

From version 1, CA-43 shifts further to the West, adding Chino and Montclair. The Latino majority actually slightly increases in the process. Joe Baca would have no trouble running here, and he would probably have little difficulty in CA-41 either if he preferred to run there.




CA-44

Incumbent: ?Ken Calvert?, ?Mary Bono? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+6
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 41% Obama, R+12
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 41% Obama, R+12
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 44% White, 42% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 60% White, 25% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 62% White, 26% Latino

Version 2 of CA-44 is no different politically than version 1.0 (though possibly it is more like R+11 now). But geographically, it shifts further into Riverside County, adding much of Mary Bono’s GOP base areas, and even picks up a small section of San Bernadino County. This district would likely result in an interesting primary between Mary Bono (who is probably seen as too moderate to go unchallenged in a GOP primary) and Ken Calvert (who is reportedly being investigated by the FBI). Perhaps (I am only half kidding here) Doug Hoffman would run here as well, providing a true Conservative alternative…




CA-45

Incumbent: Mary Bono (R)
Previous District PVI: R+3
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 55% Obama, D+2
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 61% Obama, D+8
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 42% White, 45% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 35% White, 51% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 34% White, 52% Latino

CA-45 becomes more Democratic than in version 1 by exchanging white GOP areas for Lake Tahoe. I would have liked to expand the Latino majority in this district, but was not really possible without reducing the Hispanic percentage in other Latino majority districts like CA-42 and CA-51. It was also tough to find somewhere suitable to put Lake Tahoe – I didn’t want to waste a lot of Democratic votes, but there were not many non-majority minority and non-Republican districts in Southern California that could easily extend northwards through Inyo and Mono Counties. The Inyo/Mono/Alpine/Lake Tahoe portion of the district voted 64% for Obama, while the rest (which is 57% Latino) voted about 60% for Obama. Mary Bono would be more likely to try her luck in a GOP primary in CA-44 than to fight a losing battle here.




CA-37

Incumbent: Laura Richardson (D)
Previous District PVI: D+26
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 64% Obama, D+11
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 67% Obama, D+14
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 13% White, 22% Black, 13% Asian, 48% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 31% White, 18% Black, 11% Asian, 36% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 31% White, 19% Black, 11% Asian, 38% Latino

For version 2 of CA-37, I managed to knock the black population up a notch to 19%, by running through a different section of Long Beach. 37% of the district (Fountain Valley, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach) is in Orange County and voted for McCain 54-46. But that Orange County section is overwhelmed by the LA County portion, which includes Compton (96% for Obama), areas of LA nearby, and part of Long Beach. The overall Obama percentage goes up to 67%, partly because it actually gets more Democratic, but also because I think I originally slightly underestimated how Democratic this district was. The vote around Compton is really overwhelming – though it might be less so with Obama not on the ballot, this seat still should be very safe.




CA-46

Incumbent: Dana Rohrabacher (R)
Previous District PVI: R+3
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 60% Obama, D+7
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 61% Obama, D+8
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 59% White, 18% Asian, 18% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 50% White, 10% Asian, 29% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 37% White, 22% Asian, 30% Latino

Only 30% of CA-46 is in Orange County now, but it does get substantially more Democratic (relative to version 1) because the areas of Orange County that are retained (chiefly the area around Westminster) are relatively Republican, while some of the areas of Orange County in version 1.0 (particularly Costa Mesa and Laguna Woods) voted for Obama. Those Democratic Orange County areas are donated to CA-40. Some of the areas in LA County that are added to CA-46 are only relatively weakly Democratic as well, and there are even a few McCain precincts in the LA county part of the district. It would be easy to make this district more Democratic by switching around some precincts with the neighboring 37th and 39th districts, but I didn’t do so in order to keep the minority populations well up in those VRA districts. This district makes much more sense geographically than the elongated snake in version 1.




CA-48

Incumbent: ?John Campbell? (R) ?Ed Royce? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+6
District 1.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 52% Obama, R+1
District 2.0 estimated Obama/McCain: 42% Obama, R+11
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 61% White, 17% Asian, 18% Latino
District 1.0 Demographics: 44% White, 19% Asian, 29% Latino
District 2.0 Demographics: 71% White, 11% Asian, 13% Latino

In Version 2.0, CA-48 is conceded to the GOP, becoming a thoroughly Republican district entirely contained within Orange County. It is just about the most heavily GOP district that could be created entirely within Orange County. In the northwest, the district starts in GOP north Fullerton. It takes in all of heavily GOP, high turnout Yorba Linda. More of the same as it heads through heavily GOP areas of Tustin and  Anaheim. It heads east to pick up more GOP areas surrounding the 40th district, including Mission Viejo, Santa Margarita, and Laguna Niguel. It then turns back to the North-West, through a thin coastal strip of Laguna Beach (hopefully not picking up too many Democrats), and ends by adding Newport Beach. By taking in so many GOP voters, it is possible to make the remaining Orange County districts both more Democratic and more compact. It also allows the 44th District to move into Riverside and San Bernadino counties, making other seats in the inland empire more Democratic.

I also made some minor alterations in the distribution of the Latino districts in LA in order to make the Latino percentages high in each, but that doesn’t alter their political status (safely Democratic).

Redistricting California 2010: Let Only 4 Republicans Be Safe

I decided to try my hand at redistricting California’s Congressional districts for 2010-2012, using Dave’s Redistricting App. After playing around with it a bit, here’s what the map I came up with looks like overall:

Here’s the 2008 Obama/McCain vote in California, on the precinct level:

Read on for a detailed analysis and breakdown:

California redistricting after the 2010 census presents a great opportunity for Democrats. In 2000, a bipartisan incumbent protection map was drawn, which very effectively protected all incumbents – both Democrats and Republicans. In fact, since that map was drawn, only 1 seat has changed hands. That was CA-11, lost by Richard Pombo to Jerry McNerney in 2006. With time, as California has continued to become more strongly Democratic, the Congressional map has effectively turned into a GOP gerrymander.

My goal was to make as many seats as possible that voted about 63% for Obama, while making as many of the rest of the remaining seats as possible at least competitive and winnable for Democrats, and conceding as few seats as possible to the GOP. My vote estimates are not exact (I did not add up all the precincts), but should generally be accurate, and any errors should be small enough to not really effect the overall partisan status of each district. My vote percentages take into account only Democratic and Republican votes, disregarding 3rd party votes which do not alter the outcome – so 63% for Obama necessarily means 37% for McCain as well. However, if CA 3rd party voters cast votes for major party candidates in Congressional races, on net it should probably help Democrats – a majority of 3rd Party votes in California were cast for Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. I also assumed that California will keep 53 districts, though it is possible that California will lose one (or who knows, even gain, if the census count is high).

In theory, it would be possible to redistrict California so that every Congressional district voted for Obama. But that would require either a bit more gerrymandering than I was willing to contemplate (like running a district from downtown San Francisco to Shasta County), or would require weakening some Democratic seats to the point that they might actually become winnable for Republicans. So instead I settled on trying to create the maximum number of seats with a PVI at or near about D+10. If a Democratic incumbent in a seat which is about D+10 loses their seat to a Republican, they probably deserve to lose it – corruption, scandal, $100,000 in the freezer, and we are probably better off without them. But even if the GOP did manage to momentarily pick up a D+10 district, Democrats would have an excellent chance of picking it back up in the next cycle. Other than scandal, it would take a truly formidable national GOP wave, greater than that of 1994 or 2006, to lose more than a handful of D+10 seats. And in that case, the GOP would control Congress regardless of what happens in California.

I also made a statewide precinct map showing the Obama/McCain vote in 2008 on the precinct level. It is not entirely complete, because no votes were cast in some irredeemably rural “precincts” and some precincts have changed. But for the most part it should get the job done in the areas where we have to worry about looking below the county level. I could have never done Southern California in particular without this. There are 8 shades of blue and red, equally incremented by 6.25 points each, so that for example, the lightest blue means that Obama won the precinct with 50-56.25% of the vote, while the darkest blue precincts voted 93.75-100% for Obama. There’s also a bigger version of the same map if you want to a more zoomed in view (big image, you were warned).

In addition, here’s the 2008 Obama/McCain vote with the size of each precinct adjusted in proportion to the actual number of votes cast in the precinct, rather than its geographical size. With the caveat that this slightly understates Republican strength because the few counties missing in the previous map voted for McCain, this is in one sense a more true depiction of the the Presidential vote in California. It also really brings home what a great proportion of the vote was cast in the LA and Bay areas. There are really not that many substantial clusters of red precincts that cannot be overwhelmed with surrounding blue areas. While in the geographic precinct map, it looks like McCain won some substantial areas, the reality is that he won in very few places – McCain only won in the most sparsely populated areas of the state and in select CA suburbs and exurbs. (Click here for a zoomed in version of the same map).

I’d also recommend anyone interested in California redistricting read Silver Spring’s earlier work on redistricting California, (which gave me some of the ideas that went into this map), which drew a map with 44 Democratic, 7 GOP, and 2 swing seats while increasing Latino and Asian American opportunity districts and generally respecting community/political boundaries. But I wanted to see if I could push the map further, conceding fewer GOP seats and further increasing Hispanic and Asian American representation, without endangering any existing Democratic incumbents.

The future political shape of California

California voted 61% for Obama to 37% for McCain. Disregarding 3rd party votes, Obama got 62% to McCain’s 38%. Obama also managed to narrowly win 8 of 19 GOP held districts which had been gerrymandered to be safe GOP, proving by example that there are potential progressive gains to be made in California.

Because California is unlikely to become much more Republican over the next 10 years, the likelihood that an aggressive redistricting plan will backfire, like the 2000 GOP gerrymander of Pennsylvania, is minimal. The chief reason for this is that California is a Majority Minority state in which the white population will to continue to decline as a share of the population. Yet white voters made up 63% of the electorate in California in 2008 even though they only make up 42% of the population. Simply put, as time passes, the electorate in California will continue to become less white, and more racially representative of the population as a whole. So there are really only two ways that the GOP can gain any ground (or avoid losing it) in California – they must either suddenly start getting support from minority voters, or they must start receiving levels of white support that they only now really get in parts of the South and a few other places. Given the GOP trend on issues like the confirmation of Sonia Sotamayor, it seems unlikely that the GOP can possibly pick up any meaningful sort of ground among minoritiesby 2020, assuming that the GOP does not suddenly transform into a very different party.

According to exit polls, the 2008 vote in California broke down by race as follows. White and black voters exceeded their share of the population, while the percentage of the electorate that was Asian American or Hispanic was only half the percentage of the population that was Asian American or Hispanic.



















































Actual 2008 Vote
% of Electorate Obama McCain Effective Obama Support
White 63.0% 52.0% 46.0% 53.1%
African American 10.0% 94.0% 5.0% 94.9%
Latino 18.0% 74.0% 23.0% 76.3%
Asian 6.0% 64.0% 35.0% 64.6%
Other 3.0% 55.0% 41.0% 57.3%
Total 62.3%

Now, what would the 2008 vote in California have looked like if the electorate had the same racial breakdown as the population as a whole? Assuming that each racial group gave the same % to Obama, he would have done 3 points better (7 on net). And that even includes cutting the African American percentage of the electorate by nearly HALF. This is what the future of the California electorate looks like, and it looks hopeless for Republicans.




















































What if the 2008 Electorate looked like the population?
% of Population Obama McCain Effective Obama Support
White 42.0% 52.0% 46.0% 53.1%
African American 5.9% 94.0% 5.0% 94.9%
Latino 36.6% 74.0% 23.0% 76.3%
Asian 12.2% 64.0% 35.0% 64.6%
Other 3.3% 55.0% 41.0% 57.3%
Total 65.6%

So what if the GOP were able to get a massive swing of white voters? With the 2008 electorate, McCain would have had to win white voters 2 to 1 to have pulled even in California (much less win it). In fact, he lost white voters 52-46. With the future electorate, things are naturally even bleaker for the GOP. In fact, with an electorate that looked like California’s population (the future electorate that CA is trending towards), Obama could have lost white voters 53-45 and still done better than he actually did in 2008.




















































What if the 2008 Electorate looked like the population?
% of Population Obama McCain Effective Obama Support
White 42.0% 45.0% 53.0% 45.9%
African American 5.9% 94.0% 5.0% 94.9%
Latino 36.6% 74.0% 23.0% 76.3%
Asian 12.2% 64.0% 35.0% 64.6%
Other 3.3% 55.0% 41.0% 57.3%
Total 62.6%

It would obviously take much more for Republicans to even come close to winning Statewide elections. In fact, for McCain to have won California without making gains with minorities and with the 2008 electorate, he would have needed to win white voters 66-32. If the electorate had broken down by race the same way as the population, he would have had to win white voters 83-15. And that only just barely gets a narrow GOP win.

Coming close to winning statewide elections is precisely what it would take for the GOP to start putting more than a handful of the D+10 seats in any danger at all. There’s just flat out no way that they can do that in California without appealing to a meaningful number of progressive voters in the Bay Area and in Los Angeles. And frankly, if the GOP starts appealing in places like Los Angeles and the Bay Area, then they will have rejected most of what they currently stand for and progressive Democrats will have already won (or failed spectacularly to the point of creating a GOP wave far exceeding 1994 or 2006). It would be foolishly Rovian to claim that is impossible, but it is a very high bar to hurdle, especially because the national GOP is so deeply averse to even the facade of quasi-moderation of exhibited by Republicans like Schwarzenegger, Crist, and Snowe.

Political Impact

The political impact of this map would be to increase the number of Democrats in Congress from California. Barring major scandal, California should have an approximately 40-13 Democratic delegation (including all 33 current Democratic incumbents). That’s likely to be at least 44-9. And in a best case scenario, in which all the swing seats turn blue, California even has a chance to send an overwhelming 49-4 Democratic delegation to Washington. Moreover, most of the new Democrats elected would likely be reasonably progressive Democrats.

The drawing of a Congressional map along these lines would also have the effect of neutering the net national partisan impact of Republican gerrymanders in states like Florida and Texas. While my personal preference would be to have all districts drawn by a non-partisan commission, it is no good if only Democrats do that in states where Democrats will control redistricting, while the GOP goes on a gerrymandering binge in states expected to gain seats like Florida, Texas, Georgia, and Utah. But with an aggressive redrawing of the lines California, Democrats can in one fell swoop come close to making sure that redistricting will not be a net negative on the national level. By carefully drawing the seats so that newly Democratic districts have strong progressive bases in areas like Los Angeles and the Bay Area, we can also increase the likelihood that better Democrats will be elected from those districts.



















District Political Status
Dem 39
Lean Dem 5
Swing 5
GOP 4

Safe Democratic seats

I classify 39 seats as reasonably safe Democratic seats. All of these districts voted 60%+ for Obama (D+7), and 28 of them voted 63%+ for Obama (D+10).

Lean Democratic seats

There are 5 Lean Democratic seats (3, 20, 42, 45, 50). The 20th is already in Democratic hands (and could probably be made safer pretty easily), and there would be a very good chance of picking up the other 4 seats in 2012, especially if Obama again does well in California. These seats all voted 55-58% for Obama and are likely to become more Democratic – 3 of them are new majority Latino seats, and the others have substantial minority populations whose turnout should gradually rise).

Swing Seats

These are seats that voted from 51% to 53% for Obama (4, 40, 41, 44, 48, 49). 40, 41, and 48 all have white populations that make up less than 50% of the district’s population, and should continue to become more Democratic as minority turnout increases. There is no guarantee that Democrats will necessarily be able to pick up all (or any) of these seats, but strong candidates ought to be able to run competitive races and win in these districts.

GOP Seats

Finally, there are 4 safe GOP seats. These all voted about 32-41% for Obama and are designed to be completely unwinnable for Democrats. These districts all serve to suck in the maximum number of Republicans possible, making surrounding districts more Democratic.

In retrospect, if I were to redraw the map, I might consider conceding one more safe GOP seat in the Orange County/Riverside/San Bernadino area. If the most heavily GOP areas remaining were combined into one more district, it would be pretty easy to make a number of swing/lean Dem seats a bit more Democratic.

The Voting Rights Act

I endeavored to follow the requirements of the Voting Rights Act in full, and tried to even go a bit beyond its strict requirements. From the districts drawn in 2000, I managed to substantially increase minority voting strength for both Latinos and Asian Americans, while maintaining effective black control or at least substantial influence over 4 districts. :











































































VRA Status of New Districts
District Type # of Districts % of Districts % of Population
Majority White 19 35.8% 42.3%
Plurality White 11 20.8% 42.3%
Total White 30 56.6% 42.3%
Majority Latino 15 28.3% 36.6%
Plurality Latino 1 1.9% 36.6%
Total Latino 16 30.2% 36.6%
Plurality Asian 3 5.7% 12.5%
Effective Black 4 7.5% 6.7%

Increase Latino voting strength

5 new Majority Latino seats are added. They are the the 18th, 21st, 25th, 42nd, and 45th. CA-32 also changes to an Asian plurality district, which is offset by the change of CA-26 to a Latino majority district. Factors such as how complete the census count of Latinos is and how concentrated Latino population growth actually is will have a big effect on the actual location and shapes of these districts, but in reality it ought to be possible to add a number of new Latino majority districts.

Increase Asian American voting strength

The 12th, 15th, and 32nd districts become Asian American plurality districts. Although Asians are not a homogeneous group politically or ethnically, and although Californians have sometimes elected Asian Americans in districts without a particularly large Asian community (like Doris Matsui in Sacramento), Asian voters will now have more of a guarantee that they can elect candidates of their choice.

Maintain African American voting strength

I tried to maintain African American voting strength as much as I could, but trends are working against the maintanance of the existing 4 districts which are effectively controlled by African American voters (CA-9, CA-33, CA-35, CA-37). Particularly in the 3 LA districts, Latino population growth is gradually overwhelming the African American population, particularly in CA-35. Additionally, population growth has not kept up with the state average in these districts, meaning that they will need to expand – and there are really no more concentrations of black voters nearby that can be added to the 3 districts. On the basis of population, one could probably justify merging the African American areas of the 3 existing districts into two districts with higher African American populations, but I did not do this in order to try and protect all incumbents. If a merger of these districts does not happen in 2010, the voters may well make it happen anyway, making a merger in 2020 a near certainty. But despite these difficulties, I managed to actually slightly increase the black population % in CA-9 and CA-33. In CA-35 and 37, the African American percentage drops, but the main threat to effective black control of these districts (Latino voters) are decreased as a share of the population. By making these districts more white and more Republican, Maxine Waters and Laura Richardson are probably actually safer, because the main threat to their incumbancy is a primary challenge from a Latino Democrat. While one could arge that this disenfranchises Latinos, there is really no other way to maintain black VRA districts that I can see, and the Latinos removed from CA-35 and CA-37 help make it possible to create other Latino majority districts in the LA area.

Breakdown of the Districts

Finally, let’s look at the new districts themselves, in aggregate and individually. Because I de-packed many overly Democratic districts, the average and median district becomes more Republican, while a greater number of districts become Democratic.




































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































District Summary
District New Dist Est. Obama% Old Dist Obama % Change in Obama % Designation VRA Status Region
1 63 67 -4 Dem Majority White Northern California
2 39 44 -5 GOP Majority White Northern California
3 57 50 7 Lean Dem Majority White Northern California
4 53 45 8 Swing Majority White Northern California
5 62 71 -9 Dem Plurality White Northern California
6 72 78 -6 Dem Majority White Northern California
7 63 73 -10 Dem Majority White Bay Area
8 81 87 -6 Dem Majority White Bay Area
9 83 90 -7 Dem Effective Black Bay Area
10 63 66 -3 Dem Majority White Bay Area
11 61 55 6 Dem Plurality White Bay Area
12 79 76 3 Dem Plurality Asian Bay Area
13 64 76 -12 Dem Plurality White Bay Area
14 73 75 -2 Dem Majority White Bay Area
15 69 70 -1 Dem Plurality Asian Bay Area
16 66 71 -5 Dem Plurality Latino Bay Area
17 65 74 -9 Dem Majority White Central California
18 60 60 0 Dem Majority Latino Central California
19 63 47 16 Dem Plurality White Bay Area
20 56 61 -5 Lean Dem Majority Latino Central California
21 67 43 24 Dem Majority Latino Central California
22 32 39 -7 GOP Majority White Central California
23 62 67 -5 Dem Majority White Central California
24 63 51 12 Dem Majority White Greater LA
25 65 51 14 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
26 62 52 10 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
27 62 68 -6 Dem Plurality White Greater LA
28 76 78 -2 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
29 61 69 -8 Dem Plurality White Greater LA
30 64 72 -8 Dem Majority White Greater LA
31 73 82 -9 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
32 63 70 -7 Dem Plurality Asian Greater LA
33 94 88 6 Dem Effective Black Greater LA
34 65 76 -11 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
35 76 86 -10 Dem Effective Black Greater LA
36 64 66 -2 Dem Plurality White Greater LA
37 64 81 -17 Dem Effective Black Greater LA
38 63 73 -10 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
39 62 67 -5 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
40 52 48 4 Swing Plurality White Greater LA
41 53 45 8 Swing Plurality White Greater LA
42 58 46 12 Lean Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
43 63 69 -6 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
44 41 50 -9 GOP Majority White Greater LA
45 55 52 3 Lean Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
46 60 49 11 Dem Majority White Greater LA
47 60 61 -1 Dem Majority Latino Greater LA
48 52 50 2 Swing Plurality White Greater LA
49 51 46 5 Swing Majority White San Diego
50 57 52 5 Lean Dem Majority White San Diego
51 62 64 -2 Dem Majority Latino San Diego
52 38 46 -8 GOP Majority White San Diego
53 63 70 -7 Dem Plurality White San Diego
Average 62.17 63.37 -1
Median 63.00 66.88 -4

Northern California

I defined the Northern California region as pretty much everything from Sacramento northwards. It includes 6 districts. 4 Should be Democratic, while CA-2 is Republican and CA-4 is a swing district. This is the whitest part of the State, and therefore probably the part of the State where there is the greatest potential for the GOP to make gains (even if it seems improbable at best that they will make much headway in liberal areas like Sonoma County). For that reason I decided not get too overly aggressive here. It would be possible to avoid conceding a GOP district in the far North-East, but unless you did something like draw a tentacle from Nancy Pelosi’s district up into rural GOP areas, it would be very hard to then also avoid creating a strong or leaning GOP district in the Sierra Nevada’s East and South-East of Sacramento. So I didn’t even try. Instead, I took advantage of the opportunity to move Nancy Pelosi’s district north without endangering the 1st or 6th districts, giving her Marin County across the Golden Gate bridge, which, as we will see, makes it possible to squeeze a great deal out of the Eastern side of the San Francisco Bay.

Northern California





Sacramento Area





San Francisco Bay Area

Every single seat based in the San Francisco Bay area is safely Democratic. A number of these districts also extend outwards to the east, in order to avoid wasting too many votes in ultra-Demacratic districts. But many districts remain entirely within the Bay area, and if one were willing to draw pinwheels flowing out from San Francisco and the San Mateo Peninsula to places like Bakersfield, Fresno, and Barstow, you could pretty easily squeeze out another one or two utterly safe Democratic districts.

Northern Bay Area





Southern Bay Area





Central California

Given the GOP lean of much of this region, having only 1 GOP district is not bad. Latino voting strength is greatly increased in this area. Although it might not be at all certain that all of the Latino districts will immediately have an effective Latino voting majority, they will with time. This is the most obviously gerrymandered part of the state, but that is necessary in order to increase Latino voting strength and to increase Democratic strength in less heavily Latino areas. The actual lines in this area will be greatly affected by the actual distribution of Latino population growth within counties.

Central Coast





Central Valley





LA Area

I am using a broad definition of the LA area, including areas beyond the city of Los Angeles proper, including Orange, Riverside, San Bernadino, and Ventura counties. In this area, and especially in LA County, some of the districts are better thought of as general ideas than specific exact proposals. I am fairly certain that someone who knows the area better than I do could draw the urban lines a bit more sensibly while maintaining or increasing all the political benefits and fully complying with the Voting Rights Act (a major cause of strange district shapes). Additionally, the 2008 Population Estimates are only available on the County level – so the actual population will be distributed somewhat differently than in the lines I drew. The exact lines should not be taken too literally, but it should be possible to draw roughly similar districts with the same basic demographic and political results. I may have mistakenly drawn some Democratic incumbents’ houses out of their district, but in reality that would probably be easy to avoid, if it matters. The greater LA area also has the greatest concentration of minorities in California.

That is the chief reason why I was more willing to draw some districts that were only lean Democratic or swing seats – because of their high but still relatively low turnout Latino and Asian American populations, many districts are safe bets to become more Democratic as that turnout increases. So even if these seats do not all flip Democratic in 2012, there is a great chance that they will flip some time between 2014 and 2020. Still, you can make a good argument for either conceding another seat to the GOP (or sending another district or 2 deep into the heart of LA), and if I were redrawing the map I would probably concede a third safe GOP seat in the Orange/Riverside/Burnadino area in order to make the surrounding districts more Democratic. But the overall point is that there is no reason for any district in LA County to be Republican, and from LA County, a number of districts can be safely extended outwards to make even more Democratic seats. It also ought to be possible to create more Latino majority seats and an Asian American plurality seat.

Southern California





Northern LA area





Southern LA area





Eastern LA area





San Diego

Last but not least, the San Diego area. Democrats currently hold only 2 of 5 seats in this area, while Obama won 54-44. With the exception of CA-51, the minority population in San Diego is relatively small. But even without relying on votes from Los Angeles, it should be possible to make 3 fairly strong Democratic districts, one heavily GOP district, and a swing district out of this area.





Breakdown of the Districts

And now to all 53 of the individual districts, one by one.

























CA-1

Incumbent: Mike Thompson (Blue Dog D) v. Wally Herger (R)
Previous District PVI: D+13
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 60% Obama, D+7
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 63% White
New District Demographics: 66% White

CA-1 pairs Napa Blue dog Mike Thompson with Butte County (which narrowly voted for Obama) Republican Wally Herger. The district basically consists of Napa, Yolo, Colusa, Sutter, ande Butte counties, along with the section of Sonoma County previously in CA-1. Those areas combined voted 60% for Obama, and that is the basic partisan orientation of this district. If that’s not Democratic enough, it could easily be made stronger by trading some Sonoma area territory with CA-6. Some relatively unpopulated parts of Yolo and Sutter Counties are cut out to provide a path for CA-4 to connect Yolo and Placer counties, and the city of Marysville in Yuba County is thrown in to equalize the population.

In the event that Herger decided to actually run in this district, he would almost certainly lose. Half of the districts population lives in Napa, Yolo, and Sonoma counties, and would vote heavily for Thomson. In the other half of the district, Herger might win, but would have a lot of trouble winning by enough to offset the heavily Democratic Napa/Yolo/Sonoma margin. It is also easier to imagine Thomson appealing to voters in Butte County than it is to imagine Herger appealing to San Francisco Bay area liberals.

But more than likely this is a moot point, because Herger would almost certainly take one look at CA-1 and opt to run in CA-2 instead, which includes a lot of his rural GOP base areas.

























CA-2

Incumbent: ?Wally Herger? (R), ?Tom McClintock? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+11
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 39% Obama, R+14
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 72% White
New District Demographics: 78% White

CA-2 serves to pack as many rural Northern California Republicans as possible into one district. It is the whitest district in California, and is very strongly Republican. CA-2 includes compact rural counties in Northern California, and snakes down through Placer, El Dorado, and Amador counties to pick up rural/exurban GOP areas, leaving closer in Sacramento suburbs in Placer County to CA-4, and leaving the more Democratic Lake Tahoe area to CA-10.

As discussed with CA-1, Wally Herger would probably run in this district, even though he lives in the new CA-1. Tom McClintock would also probably want prefer to run in this district than in a swing district, even though he lives in the new CA-5. In the event of a primary between Herger and McClintock, Herger would probably prevail because slightly more of the new CA-2 comes from Herger’s old district than from the old CA-4, and Herger has longer standing actual ties to the area than McClintock.

























CA-3

Incumbent: Dan Lungren (R)
Previous District PVI: R+6
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 57% Obama, D+4
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 65% White
New District Demographics: 56% White

CA-3 is now entirely within Sacramento County, and is substantially more Democratic than the old CA-3, which voted narrowly for Obama. There is a delicate balancing act here between hurting Lungren and keeping Matsui secure. It would be possible to make CA-3 even more Democratic, but not without dragging CA-5 under roughly D+10, which I wanted to avoid. It is not a complete certainty that Lungren would lose in this district, but it is a certainly that he would face very competitive elections every 2 years until he does.

























CA-4

Incumbent: None
Previous District PVI: R+10
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 53% Obama, D+0
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 79% White
New District Demographics: 57% White

The new CA-4 is a bona fide suburban swing district, combining 99% of Democratic Solano County (4/7 of the district) with GOP leaning Sacramento Suburban part of Placer county, and sparsely populated areas in between to connect them. There is no real incumbent in this district, but Charlie Brown would be well positioned to win here. This district is much less Republican than the old version, which he only barely lost in 2008. If not, a Democrat from Solano County would have a good chance of winning here. The only potential hitch is the fast pace of growth in Placer County. If that tends to increase GOP margins, this district will become more Republican with time. On the other hand, if the Sacramento suburbs liberalize as they grow, this district will stay roughly even or move slightly more Democratic. It would be pretty easy to make this district more Democratic by extending it further into the Bay Area, but I kept it more compact and suburban based.

























CA-5

Incumbent: Doris Matsui (D)
Previous District PVI: D+15
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 62% Obama, D+9
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 39% White
New District Demographics: 46% White

CA-5 becomes more Republican, but not Republican enough to put Doris Matsui in any realistic danger. It now crosses over (barely) into Yolo County to pick up West Sacramento, but otherwise is based very much in Sacramento proper.

























CA-6

Incumbent: Lynn Woolsey (D)
Previous District PVI: D+23
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 72% Obama, D+19
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 70% White
New District Demographics: 71% White

CA-6 ditches highly progressive Marin County to pick up less-progressive-but-still-progressive areas further North along the coast. Lynn Woolsey still has absolutely nothing to worry about, and could easily take on some more GOP turf or donate some heavily Democratic areas to CA-1. Alternatively, CA-2 could be sucked into CA-6/Marin and become a swing or Democratic district rather than being conceded to the GOP, but that would make it much more difficult to make CA-4 a swing district, and much more difficult to turn CA-10 into a Democratic district with a strong base in the Sierra Nevadas, and would also necessitate some more county splitting.

























CA-7

Incumbent: George Miller (D)
Previous District PVI: D+19
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 39% White, 27% Latino
New District Demographics: 50% White, 31% Latino

CA-7 moves out of Solano County, and into San Joaquin where it picks up Lodi, Tracy, and Manteca (most of the county other than Stockton). The district also cedes areas around Richmond to CA-10 and CA-9, resulting in a more Republican District. My intention was to bring it down to about D+10, but it could be a couple points off in either direction. If it is too Republican, it would be very easy to fix that and make this district more Democratic. CA-7 isn’t D+19 any more, but it does not really need to be. Long time incumbent George Miller, who has been in Congress since 1974, will not be in any danger of suddenly now losing his seat simply becase it becomes a bit less Democratic.

























CA-8

Incumbent: Nancy Pelosi (D)
Previous District PVI: D+35
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 81% Obama, D+28
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 45% White, 30% Asian
New District Demographics: 61% White, 18% Asian

Nancy Pelosi’s CA-8 plays a very important but subtle role in this overall map. By crossing the Golden Gate Bridge and taking in Marin County, her district becomes slightly less Democratic. But that’s not the main point. By taking in Marin County, it allows CA-6 to push northwards, and just as importantly, it sucks CA-12 into San Francisco (making it Asian plurality in the process), and sucks all the districts to the South-East of it towards San Francisco. This dominoes through the districts and ultimately provides the impetus to pull more Republican districts in the Central Valley further in towards areas like Santa Cruz, San Jose, and Alameda.

























CA-9

Incumbent: Barbara Lee (D)
Previous District PVI: D+37
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 83% Obama, D+30
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 36% White, 20% Black, 17% Asian, 23% Latino
New District Demographics: 37% White, 22% Black, 16% Asian, 21% Latino

The percentage of African Americans in Barbara Lee’s new 9th District is not just maintained, but actually increased, even while the district becomes a little bit less Democratic. I did this by trading ultra-liberal but predominantly white areas of her district (principally Berkeley) for predominantly white liberal areas in Contra Costa County, along with Richmond, which has a fairly high black population. So the district now consists of Oakland, Richmond, and areas of Contra Costa county like Orinda, Walnut Creek, and Pleasantville.

























CA-10

Incumbent: ?John Garamendi? (D)
Previous District PVI: D+11
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 56% White
New District Demographics: 60% White

This new version of CA-10 is rather different from the previous CA-10, and is drawn under the assumption that John Garamendi wins the CA-10 special election. This district is probably the most bizarrely shaped of all the districts I drew, but it makes sense, at least from the perspective of drawing a distrcit that would be good for Garamendi. Republican George Radanovich also lives here (in Mariposa), but he wouldn’t have much chance if he ran in this district.

Nearly 4/7 of the population of CA-10 live in Contra Costa or Alameda Counties, and those areas are all very heavily Democratic (Berkeley – where Garamendi went to college, El Cerrito, San Pablo, Pinole). From there, it snakes through sparsely populated parts of Solano, Amador, and Sacramento counties, picking up Garamendi’s home along the way. Then it enters the Sierra Nevada mountain range through Calaveras county, where Garamendi was born and has a ranch. It picks up Republican leaning areas near Yosemite National Park (Garamendi was Deputy Secretary of the Interior), and picks up a mixture of Rural Republicans and more liberal Lake Tahoe/ski areas up and down the Nevada border, stretching from Inyo County in the south to Nevada County in the north. I have to say, I was sorely tempted to cross into Fresno and Tulare counties to pick up Sequoia and King’s Canyon National park, and into San Bernadino to take in all of Death Valley, but I restrained myself.

Alpine, Calaveras, Inyo, Mariposa, Mono, Nevada, and Toulumne counties collectively voted McCain 52% to Obama 48%. If you assume that liberal areas around Lake Tahoe (parts of Placer and El Dorado counties) roughly cancel out extraneous GOP areas, and that the Contra Costa/Alameda county parts of the district voted about 75% for Obama, then you end up with a district that voted about 63% for Obama, litte changed from the current partisan stance of CA-10. And there we have it – a district that takes care of some hard to deal with GOP areas in the Sierras, avoids wasting Democratic votes along the Nevada border on a GOP district, that opens up space in eastern Contra Costa County for CA-7 to dilute GOP votes in San Joaquin county, and that John Garamendi should be able to effectively represent despite the district’s bizarre geographic shape, given his background. Whew!

As a more compact alternative to this, instead of reaching all the way to Berkeley, the district could combine the Sierras with a different and nearer Democratic area, such as the city of San Joaquin. But then this district would not include Garamendi’s home, would be only weakly Democratic rather than safe, would be less progressive, and would really be more like a reconfigured 19th than the 10th.

























CA-11

Incumbent: Jerry McNerney (D)
Previous District PVI: R+1
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 61% Obama, D+8
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 51% White, 26% Latino
New District Demographics: 45% White, 27% Latino

CA-11 is altered significantly to make it more Democratic. It now takes in all of the city of Stockton, in exchange for which it gives up some relatively conservative areas to CA-7. It also expands a bit more in Alameda County, taking on Livermore as well as a bit of territory from Pete Stark and Barbara Lee. The end result is a much safer district for McNerney. I guesstimate that it voted roughly 61% for Obama, but that could be off by a few percentage points. If it is too Republican, that is easy to fix.

























CA-12

Incumbent: Jackie Speier (D)
Previous District PVI: D+23
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 79% Obama, D+26
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 45% White, 31% Asian
New District Demographics: 35% White, 38% Asian

CA-12 moves further into San Francisco to accomadate Pelosi’s shift into Marin County. In the process, it turns into a district with a slight Asian American plurality.

























CA-13

Incumbent: Pete Stark (D)
Previous District PVI: D+22
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 64% Obama, D+11
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 29% White, 35% Asian, 23% Latino
New District Demographics: 37% White, 26% Asian, 28% Latino

CA-13 is still primarily based in Alameda County, where 2/3 of the district is located, retaining Pete Stark’s home town of Fremont, along with Union City, Newark, and most of Hayward. It then crosses through unpopulated mountains to the east and reappears on the outskirts of Modesto, where it basically picks up the parts of Stanislaus County that were formerly in the 19th district. The end result is a district which is still strongly Democratic, but not packed as full of progressive Alameda County voters as before.

























CA-14

Incumbent: Anna Eshoo (D)
Previous District PVI: D+21
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 73% Obama, D+20
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 53% White, 21% Asian, 19% Latino
New District Demographics: 52% White, 22% Asian, 20% Latino

Like CA-12 before it, CA-14 is sucked towards San Francisco because of CA-8’s trip across the Golden Gate Bridge. In San Mateo County, it adds San Carlos, Foster City, and San Mateo. Saratoga in Santa Cruz County along with CA-14’s old section of Santa Cruz County are removed. This has no real political impact, and CA-14 remains a veritable Democratic fortress.

























CA-15

Incumbent: Mike Honda (D)
Previous District PVI: D+15
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 69% Obama, D+16
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 39% White, 36% Asian
New District Demographics: 35% White, 39% Asian

Moving parts of CA-9 and CA-13 out of Alameda County has left some people there that need to go somewhere. They go into Mike Honda’s 15th district, which is now up to 39% Asian American. No real partisan effect, except CA-15 may get a bit more Democratic.

























CA-16

Incumbent: Zoe Lofgren (D)
Previous District PVI: D+16
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 66% Obama, D+13
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 28% White, 26% Asian, 40% Latino
New District Demographics: 29% White, 19% Asian, 45% Latino

60% of CA-16 remains within Santa Clara County. To get to the rest of the district, it crosses the mountains and ends up in Stanislaus County, where it takes in the city of Modesto. strengthening the Latino plurality in the process. This only makes the district 3 or 4 points more Republican, and Zoe Lofgren has nothing to worry about.

























CA-17

Incumbent: Sam Farr (D)
Previous District PVI: D+19
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 65% Obama, D+12
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 41% White, 48% Latino
New District Demographics: 60% White, 19% Latino

Sam Farr’s district becomes much whiter than before, principally because it gives up predominantly Latino areas inland (Salinas, Hollister, Watsonville) to the 21st district in order to help give that district a strong Latino majority. In exchange, Farr adds the rest of Santa Cruz county (except for Watsonville), parts of Santa Clara county (Saratoga, Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno), as well as some conservative inland areas in San Luis Obispo and Kern counties. But 78% of the population lives in Monterrey, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz counties, all of which are strongly Democratic, so Farr’s district remains strongly Democaratic even while becoming much whiter. As a rough estimate, this district probably voted about 65% for Obama.

























CA-18

Incumbent: Dennis Cardoza (Blue Dog D)
Previous District PVI: D+4
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 60% Obama, D+7
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 32% White, 50% Latino
New District Demographics: 28% White, 52% Latino

In order to keep CA-18 majority Latino while also making CA-21 and CA-19 into 70% Latino districts, CA-18 dumps its sections of Stanislaus and San Joaquin counties. Instead, it takes in all of Merced county, then runs south through Madera County and then into Fresno, where it takes just about every precinct in the city that voted for Obama. This makes the district a couple of percentage points less white and more Latino, which also makes it a few points more Democratic.

























CA-19

Incumbent: None
Previous District PVI: R+9
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 52% White, 5% Asian, 36% Latino
New District Demographics: 47% White, 16% Asian, 30% Latino

This new CA-19 is the prime beneficiary of Nancy Pelosi’s shift northwards. It is radically different from the old CA-19, and shares no constituents with it at all. Whereas the old version was safely GOP, the new one is safely Democratic. 5/7 of the district is in San Jose, and it is an effective certainty that this district will elect another progressive San Jose Democrat. The other 200,000 people are mostly white Republicans in the Central Valey, running through farmland to pick up as many GOP voters as possible in the Visalia/Hanford/Tulare area. It is a measure of just how large the Latino population is now in the Central Valley that even though these 200,000 people are the least Latino leftover areas from after making 2 70% Latino districts, 40% of the people here are still Latino, and only 50% are white. In the end, near 70% support from Santa Clara county combined with 40% support from the Central Valley should end up with a district that voted about 63% for Obama.

























CA-20

Incumbent: Jim Costa (Blue Dog D)
Previous District PVI: D+5
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 56% Obama, D+3
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 17% White, 68% Latino
New District Demographics: 21% White, 70% Latino

If it is possible for a district that is 70% Latino to vote Republican, it will be this new, more rural version of CA-20 that leads the way. The cities of Fresno and Bakersfield are cut out entirely, and the district becomes focused on the small towns and farms of the Central Valley.

Jim Costa should be well positioned to win in this district even if it is not as immediately Democratic as one might wish, because of his background in farming, and because he has previously represented much of it. I am guessing that this district voted about 56% for Obama, but that could be way off in either direction. If it is too Republican, it should be fairly easy to make it more Democratic by rearraning the division of territory amongst the 18th, 20th, and 21st districts (the Central Valley Latino districts, possibly returning Bakersfield or Fresno). Regardless of how Democratic this district is now, over time it will steadily become more Democratic as Latinos gradually come to make up a share of the electorate closer to their share of the population. Who knows, eventually this district might elect a latter day Cesar Chavez.

























CA-21

Incumbent: None
Previous District PVI: R+13
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 67% Obama, D+14
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 40% White, 49% Latino
New District Demographics: 20% White, 70% Latino

This new CA-21 has absolutely nothing in common with the old CA-21. It is mainly carved out of the old CA-17 and CA-20. It is fully 70% Latino, which might be high enough for Latino voters to actually have effective control over the district. A number of the white voters in urban Bakersfield and in the Salinas area are Democrats, which should make this district solidly Democratic and progressive. I estimate that it voted about 67% for Obama, but there is a high margin of error to that estimate, and much depends on exactly how high Latino turnout in this district will be.

























CA-22

Incumbent: ?Kevin McCarthy? (R), ?Devin Nunes? (R), ?George Radanovich? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+16
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 32% Obama, R+21
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 57% White, 49% Latino
New District Demographics: 62% White, 30% Latino

This new CA-22 is a dumping ground for Republicans from Fresno to Bakersfield and everywhere in between. About 1/7 of this district is carved from the old 19th, 1/3 from the old 21st, and half from the old 22nd. It should have voted somewhere in the low 30s for Obama. This is the only solidly Republican district left in the Central Valley, and it is very, very solid. Even so, it is only 62% white!!! This district should make for an interesting GOP primary, as fully 3 GOP Reps have the potential to run in this ultra-GOP district.

























CA-23

Incumbent: Lois Capps (D)
Previous District PVI: D+12
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 62% Obama, D+9
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 43% White, 47% Latino
New District Demographics: 51% White, 39% Latino

CA-23 is no longer confined entirely to the coast, and now includes the entirety of Santa Barbara county. In San Luis Obispo county, it retains the same areas along the coast, but now takes in all of the city of San Luis Obispo. That shouldn’t hurt her, because essentially every precinct in the city voted for Obama. It still extends into Ventura County, but no longer picks up all of Oxnard. This makes CA-23 slightly less Democratic, but not by enough to endanger Lois Capps.

























CA-24

Incumbent: Elton Gallegly (R)
Previous District PVI: R+4
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 64% White, 26% Latino
New District Demographics: 62% White, 25% Latino

The racial demographics of CA-24 remain virtually the same. But politically, it is a district transformed. 38% of the population is now in LA County, and in liberal parts of LA County – Malibu, Santa Monica, and some other parts of West LA. It should now be about 63% Obama, give or take a percentage point. Elton Gallegly, who does not even live in the district any more, would have a tough time in this new iteration, if he bothered even running.

























CA-25

Incumbent: ?Howard McKeon? (R), ?Howard Berman?
Previous District PVI: R+6
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 65% Obama, D+12
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 44% White, 38% Latino
New District Demographics: 29% White, 55% Latino

CA-25 contracts entirely within LA County, and becomes much more Democratic. It is transformed into a 55% Latino Majority district, composed mainly of Lancaster, Palmdale, and areas around San Fernando taken from both the old 27th and 28th districts. Santa Clarita, where McKeon lives, is cut out of the district. For that reason, it is probably more likely that McKeon would run in the 27th, if he runs at all. Howard Berman (D) could also potentially opt to run in either the 25th or the 28th, both of which contain substantial chunks of his old district (but he’ll probably prefer the more strongly Democratic 28th). The 25th district is strongly Democratic, probably somewhere in the mid-60s for Obama.

























CA-26

Incumbent: ?David Dreier? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+3
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 62% Obama, D+9
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 44% White, 30% Latino
New District Demographics: 18% White, 63% Latino

David Dreier doesn’t really have anywhere to run, as fully 7 districts now include pieces of his old district. His best shot would probably actually be CA-40. The district numbered 26, which includes Dreier’s home in San Dimas, turns into a district with a strong 63% Latino majority. Only GOP leaning Glendora and San Dimas are retained from the old 26th, while predominantly Latino areas like West Covina, La Puente, El Monte, and Irwindale are added from the old 32nd and 38th districts. It probably voted somewhere in the general range of about 62% for Obama, which ought to be enough to doom Dreier here.

























CA-27

Incumbent: Brad Sherman (D) v. Howard McKeon (R)
Previous District PVI: D+13
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 62% Obama, D+9
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 38% White, 43% Latino
New District Demographics: 48% White, 35% Latino

The new 27th district adds Santa Clarita, where Howard McKeon lives, and which makes up 2/7 of the new district. To try and avoid making the 27th too Republican, I tried to get rid of the relatively less Democratic parts of his old district in exchange, keeping the more Democratic areas around Northridge. This causes the 27th to become less Democratic, but not much. Sherman should be strongly favored to take out McKeon in this district. It would also be easy to make this district a bit more Democratic if necessary.

























CA-28

Incumbent: Howard Berman (D)
Previous District PVI: D+23
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 76% Obama, D+23
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 30% White, 59% Latino
New District Demographics: 27% White, 55% Latino

The new 28th district shifts a bit to the south, picking up part of Burbank and some Latino areas to the east of Hollywood from the 31st district. I’ll just say that it in partisan terms it remains about the same as it is, and may even have become more Demacratic. The 28th should have voted about 76% for Obama – the least Democratic precincts in the district (in Burbank) still voted 65% for Obama! So if any other districts nearby need to become more Democratic, the 28th could be modified to lend a hand without breaking a sweat.

























CA-29

Incumbent: Adam Schiff (D)
Previous District PVI: D+14
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 61% Obama, D+8
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 42% White, 26% Asian, 26% Latino
New District Demographics: 46% White, 7% Asian, 33% Latino

Adam Schiff’s 29th district takes on the role of diluting GOP votes in San Bernadino County. The San Bernadino portion of the 29th takes in vast expanses of San Bernadino County taken from the former 25th and 41st districts, including Hesperia, Victorville, and Barstow, which make up just under half the population of the district. In The LA County portion, heavily Democratic areas around Pasadena are combine with strongly Democratic areas around Schiff’s home in Burbank to make this district Democratic – the parts of his old district that he gives up are the relatively more GOP parts. Even given that the San Bernadino part of the district voted for McCain by several points, the LA County part (especially Pasadena) is strongly enough Democratic that the district overall voted about 61% for Obama.

























CA-30

Incumbent: Henry Waxman (D)
Previous District PVI: D+18
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 64% Obama, D+11
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 75% White
New District Demographics: 68% White

The white voters in Henry Waxman’s district are liberal enough that redistricting Waxman’s district to make it more Republican actuall actually ends up making it less white. The base of Waxman’s district remains in Beverly Hills/West Hollywood, and then snakes up through the hills towards Ventura County. It crosses over, taking in Simi Valley, Moorpark, and some smaller areas surrounding. In sum, the Ventura component of the district makes up a third of the total population. Waxman remains very much safe.

























CA-31

Incumbent: Xavier Becerra (D)
Previous District PVI: D+29
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 73% Obama, D+20
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 12% White, 68% Latino
New District Demographics: 20% White, 62% Latino

CA-31 becomes less overwhelmingly Democratic and less overwhelmingly Latino by giving up some Latinos (indirectly to the 25th) to turn that district into a Latino majority district. In exchange, Nevertheless, it retains a very strong Latino majority (62%). Becerra picks up some less Democratic (but not really GOP) areas in Glendale and La Canada Flintridge from the old 26th and 29th districts. These new areas only make up 1/4 of the district, which remains heavily Democratic. It should be something like 73% for Obama now, which could easily be off a couple points depending on Latino turnout. Not that it matters – Becerra is utterly safe.

























CA-32

Incumbent: Judy Chu (D)
Previous District PVI: D+15
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 12% White, 20% Asian, 65% Latino
New District Demographics: 24% White, 44% Asian, 28% Latino

CA-32 is transformed from a Latino majority district into a strong Asian-American plurality district (with Dreier’s 26th becoming a Latino majority district to offset the change). I will say up front that Asian Americans are not a monolithic group, and I have no real idea how the “Asian” population breaks down. I just tried to make the district as “Asian” as possible. The best I could figure out how to do while keeping it relatively compact was 44%. With an earlier version I was able to get the Asian population higher, but that district was a true monstrosity, stretching here and there all over the place and even had a tentacle reaching into Irvine in Orange County.

The district is substantially reworked, combining areas within the old 32nd with areas from the 26th, 29th, 38th, and 43rd. It includes in the north/west Sierra Madre, Monrovia, Arcadia, San Marino, South Pasadena, Temple City, Gabriel, Alhambra, Monterey Park, and Rosemead. Then it crosses through Whittier and La Habra Heights to pick up substantial Asian populations in Diamond Bar and Walnut. This district is definitely Democratic – it contains only a few McCain precincts – but it is hard to say how much without actually taking the time to calculate partisanship on the precinct level, because it takes from so many different old districts and I don’t know much about the voting patterns or turnout of Asian Americans in this area. I’d guesstimate it is in the low 60s for Obama, but someone that knows the area could probably make a better estimate.

























CA-33

Incumbent: Diane Watson (D)
Previous District PVI: D+35
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 94% Obama, D+41
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 21% White, 27% Black, 13% Asian, 37% Latino
New District Demographics: 10% White, 29% Black, 11% Asian, 47% Latino

In order to try and keep the African American percentage in this district relatively high, I cut out some white areas of the district and added some Black/Latino areas. CA-35 has a lot of precincts that voted near unanimously for Obama, and becomes even more Democratic than it already was.

























CA-34

Incumbent: Lucille Roybal-Allard (D)
Previous District PVI: D+22
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 65% Obama, D+12
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 8% White, 81% Latino
New District Demographics: 21% White, 65% Latino

In order to increase Latino voting power in other districts while simultaneously diluting GOP votes, this district shifts, while retaining its base in the general area of Vernon. From Vernon/Maywood, the 34th now stretches east through Downey, La Mirada, and then into Orange County, where it adds Fullerton. The Orange County portion makes up only 20% of the district, which is now only 65% Latino. Even given low turnout in Latino LA County areas relative to in Fullerton, this district probably also voted about 65% for Obama – and that will go up with time as Latino turnout gradually increases.

























CA-35

Incumbent: Maxine Waters (D)
Previous District PVI: D+31
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 76% Obama, D+23
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 10% White, 28% Black, 6% Asian, 54% Latino
New District Demographics: 17% White, 26% Black, 11% Asian, 43% Latino

What to do with the McCain precincts in South-West LA County around Palos Verdes/Rolling Hills? Why, give them to Maxine Waters, of course! Doing this makes it possible to preserve African American voting strength (by decreasing the Latino percentage) and dilute GOP votes all at once. So this district becomes substantially more White, Asian, and GOP, without becoming much less Black. It is brought down to about 76% for Obama.

























CA-36

Incumbent: Jane Harman (Blue Dog D)
Previous District PVI: D+12
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 64% Obama, D+11
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 44% White, 15% Asian, 33% Latino
New District Demographics: 44% White, 16% Asian, 33% Latino

There are no real changes to Harman’s district, I only altered a tiny fraction of the district in the North. At most this might make CA-36 1 point more Republican, with emphasis on “might.”

























CA-37

Incumbent: Laura Richardson (D)
Previous District PVI: D+26
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 64% Obama, D+12
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 13% White, 22% Black, 13% Asian, 48% Latino
New District Demographics: 31% White, 18% Black, 11% Asian, 36% Latino

The 26th district is altered to become less overwhelmingly Democratic. In LA County, the 37th retains Compton and its immediate environs, then approaches the county line through Long Beach. It extends in Orange County through inland parts of Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Westminster, and Fountain Valley, up until it reaches the Santa Ana river. 40% of the district is in Orange County, while 60% is in LA county. Although the OC part voted for McCain, the LA part, rooted around Compton, is enough to make the district about a 64% Obama district that preserves African American political influence.

























CA-38

Incumbent: Grace Napolitano (D)
Previous District PVI: D+10
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 10% White, 76% Latino
New District Demographics: 28% White, 58% Latino

The 38th district has to change a good deal in order to accomodate the transition of CA-32 to an Asian plurality district. It sits south of the 32nd, following it as it loops around from the Pico Rivera area through La Habra and Brea in Orange County, and through Chino Hills in San Bernadino County in order to cross back into LA and get to Pomona. At Pomona, it expands further North and West into predominantly white areas (like Claremont) that voted for Obama. The Latino percentage drops more than one might like, but Latinos still make up a strong 58% majority of the district that will be a dominant political force, and with time that majority will increase. The drop also enables the 26th to have a strong 63% Latino majority. This district definitely gets more Republican, but I am not sure precisely how much. I estimate it is something close to D+10 now.

























CA-39

Incumbent: Linda Sanchez (D)
Previous District PVI: D+9
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 62% Obama, D+9
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 18% White, 65% Latino
New District Demographics: 20% White, 63% Latino

CA-39 now extends into Orange County, where it picks up 3/7 of the district in the Buena Park/Anaheim area. But the section of Orange County that is added is 40% Latino, 20% Asian, and voted for Obama. The area of LA County retained, which stretches all the way to Southgate, is heavily Latino and heavily Democratic. So the change should have relatively little political effect, with the district becoming maybe a few points more GOP friendly. Linda Sanchez’s district also now borders with her sister’s district (CA-47).

























CA-40

Incumbent: ?Ed Royce? (R), ?John Campbell? (R) ?David Dreier? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+8
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 52% Obama, R+1
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 42% White, 18% Asian, 34% Latino
New District Demographics: 43% White, 15% Asian, 35% Latino

The new CA-40 retains only a small portion of its old constituents around Anaheim. CA-40 has a very sinuous shape because it is an attempt to hobble together one last winnable Democratic district out of the leftovers from neighboring districts with inflexible shapes (because they are majority minority or are made as heavily GOP as possible). From Irvine, the 40th reaches north through Anaheim, and then through a verynarrow strip of Yorba Linda to cross into San Bernadino County, where it includes Chino, Montclair, and Upland. Most precincts in this district voted for Obama, although not by huge margins. Areas of Democratic strength are Irvine, Anaheim, and Montclair. Areas of GOP strength are included as well, including Upland and Lake Forest at the far Northern and Southern edges of the distict. This district is more a swing district than a Democratic district, but with its large minority population it can probably be expected to continue trending Democratic. Theoretically this is Ed Royce’s district, but he does not live in it any more, and as mentioned earlier it is very different. It bears more in common with the 48th, and GOPer John Campbell lives in this district (in Irvine). But Campbell might rather try his luck in the new 48th or attempt to prevail in a GOP primary in the 44th rather than run here.

























CA-41

Incumbent: Jerry Lewis (R)
Previous District PVI: R+10
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 53% Obama, D+0
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 55% White, 6% Black, 33% Latino
New District Demographics: 40% White, 11% Black, 39% Latino

CA-41 contracts entirely within San Bernadino County due to population growth. At first blush, this might seem to be a good thing for Jerry Lewis, because the San Bernadino portion of his district voted more strongly for McCain than the Riverside county portion. But within San Bernadino county, there are some substantial shifts. Conservative areas around Hesperia are shorn off and given to the Pasadena-Burbank based 29th district, and the 41st expands into strongly Democratic San Bernadino city (about half of the district’s population), taking most of the city except the heavily Latino south-west of the city, which remains in the 43rd to maintain the Latino percentage in CA-43 high.

This causes the white population percentage of the district to plummet 15 points to 40%, with about equal parts of the drop made up for with increased Black and Latino populations. Moreover the white voters in the district become more progressive as the population center shifts towards the City of San Bernadino. In the short term, the doubling of the African American population is more politically significant than the Latino increase, because of higher turnout and greater Democratic support than Latinos. But over the long term, the Latino population is likely to drive a continuing Democratic trend as turnout increases. It is at least conceivable that Lewis could survive in the short term in this district, but if he does, he’ll have great difficulty continuing to hold it. But this district is more a swing district than a Democratic district, and probably gave Obama about 53%, which could be off by a few points either way. This district would have a good chance of electing a progressive San Bernadino Democrat, especially after a few more years of Latino population growth.

























CA-42

Incumbent: None
Previous District PVI: R+10
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 58% Obama, D+5
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 48% White, 2% Black, 17% Asian, 29% Latino
New District Demographics: 32% White, 7% Black, 6% Asian, 51% Latino

CA-42 disappears from Orange County and reappears in Riverside County. This district consists of the city of Riverside, Perris and parts of Corona and Moreno Valley. This new district has nothing in common with the old 42nd, and most of the district is carved out of the Riverside County portion of the old CA-44. It also has no real incumbent (Ken Calvert lives in Corona, but would almost certainly much prefer to run in the heavily GOP 44th, where he would be well positioned to win the GOP primary).

























CA-43

Incumbent: Joe Baca (Blue Dog D)
Previous District PVI: D+13
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 17% White, 65% Latino
New District Demographics: 23% White, 62% Latino

CA-44 shifts slightly to the west, away from the city of San Bernadino and into Rancho Cucamonga, making it just slightly more Republican. But Baca is in no trouble, and his district retains a strong Latino majority.

























CA-44

Incumbent: ?Ken Calvert? (R) ?Darrell Issa? (R), ?Gary Miller? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+6
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 41% Obama, R+12
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 44% White, 42% Latino
New District Demographics: 60% White, 25% Latino

CA-44 is another one of the few, the proud, the California GOP districts. It combines McCain’s best parts of Orange County (stretching through the North-East of OC, from eastern Anaheim to San Clemente) with some more GOP areas in Riverside County – Norco, part of Corona, Lake Elsinore, and Hemet.

























CA-45

Incumbent: Mary Bono (R)
Previous District PVI: R+3
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 55% Obama, D+2
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 42% White, 45% Latino
New District Demographics: 35% White, 51% Latino

CA-45 has to contract due to population growth. It does this by giving up GOP Hemet, while keeping Moreno Valley. This makes a district that Obama won as it was just a bit more Democratic, making it just a bit more difficult for Mary Bono to survive here and actually more sensible geographically as well. CA-45 now has a slight Latino majority, which should continue to make CA-45 more Democratic. Bono faces the choice of struggling to hold on in an increasingly Democratic district, retiring and moving to Florida, or losing the GOP primary in CA-52.

























CA-46

Incumbent: Dana Rohrabacher (R)
Previous District PVI: R+3
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 60% Obama, D+7
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 59% White, 18% Asian, 18% Latino
New District Demographics: 50% White, 10% Asian, 29% Latino

CA-46 is changed dramatically. The LA County part of the district is altered to become much more Democratic, while the Orange County bit stays pretty competitive. Just under half of the population in CA-46 is now in Los Angeles County, now taking in most of Long Beach. In Orange County, CA-46 stretches along the coast until it gets to Newport Beach and then inland to Aliso Viejo/Laguna Niguel/Laguna Hills, where it most of the districts’ Orange County population base now lives. CA-37 has more of Rohrabacher’s old constituents, but he does not have any chance at winning there, and he does not have much chance of continuing to win in this new 46th district either.

























CA-47

Incumbent: Loretta Sanchez (Blue Dog D)
Previous District PVI: D+4
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 60% Obama, D+7
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 12% White, 16% Asian, 69% Latino
New District Demographics: 15% White, 15% Asian, 65% Latino

CA-47 changes little from the existing district, only really changing by adding all of Santa Anna. It becomes slightly less Latino and a bit more white, but only about a point more Republican. CA-47 is now the only district contained entirely within Orange County.

























CA-48

Incumbent: ?John Campbell? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+6
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 52% Obama, R+1
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 61% White, 17% Asian, 18% Latino
New District Demographics: 44% White, 19% Asian, 29% Latino

CA-48 is something of a gerrymandered monstrosity, stretching thinly all the way from Santa Margarita in the eastern part of Orange County all the way to South-Central LA around Lynwood. 4/7 of the population is in Orange County, and that part of the district is demographically quite similar to the current 48th but a bit more Republican. The rest of the district, in LA County, is only 23% white, is carved mostly out of the old 39th, and is strongly Democratic. The result is a swing district that probably voted for Obama, but not by that much.

























CA-49

Incumbent: ?Darrell Issa? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+10
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 51% Obama, R+2
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 52% White, 35% Latino
New District Demographics: 54% White, 34% Latino

CA-49 is an attempt to squeeze one last winnable district out of San Diego County, after drawing 3 safely Democratic districts (CA-50, CA-51, and CA-53), and one extremely Republican district (CA-52). It is Darrell Issa’s district, but because substantial portions of the heavily GOP 52nd come from his old district, there is a good chance he would run there instead – where he would be in a good position to beat Duncan Hunter the younger in a GOP primary. The vast majority of the population is based in San Diego County, including Carlsbad, Vista, and Oceanside. Parts of Encinitas and Escondido are also included. To the north, all of Camp Pendleton is included, and then CA-49 crosses into Orange County, picking up competitive to Democratic leaning areas along a sliver of the coast, running up to Laguna Beach (only 10% of the district is in Orange County, though). This district is something of a hedge – if the swing to Obama in the San Diego area was merely a one time event, especially around Camp Pendleton (a one time Iraq War effect?), this district will likely stay Republican. But if it is a continuing trend, Democrats will have a good shot at picking this district up.

























CA-50

Incumbent: ?Brian Bilbray? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+3
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 57% Obama, D+4
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 60% White, 22% Latino
New District Demographics: 61% White, 15% Latino

All but a small portion of CA-50 is dragged within the city limits of San Diego (with the remainder in the Democratic Del Mar/Solana Beach/Encinitas area). The most Republican parts of the district are excised and donated to CA-52, while some relatively swingy areas in the north go to the 49th. Given the close races Bilbray has run in the past, a strong Democratic candidate should have a very good chance of defeating him in this district.

























CA-51

Incumbent: Bob Filner (D)
Previous District PVI: D+8
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 62% Obama, D+9
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 17% White, 60% Latino
New District Demographics: 18% White, 58% Latino

CA-51 stays basically the same, but becomes marginally more Republican as it adds population (although the PVI gets more Democratic, the Obama vote decreases because there was a large swing to Obama from Bush). Filner will have no difficulty here against the GOP. It’s possible he might one day face a Latino primary challenger, but this is after all a Latino majority district.

























CA-52

Incumbent: ?Duncan Hunter Jr?, (R) ?Darrell Issa?, (R) ?Brian Bilbray? (R)
Previous District PVI: R+9
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 38% Obama, R+15
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 63% White, 22% Latino
New District Demographics: 73% White, 17% Latino

The new CA-52 is 2/3 in San Diego county and 1/3 in South-West Riverside County. It takes the most heavily Republican precincts it can find in the area, resulting in a very very conservative district. The question is not whether it will elect a Republican, but which Republican will win the GOP primary – it takes GOP heavy parts from CA-45, CA-49, CA-50, and CA-52. It may well actually be even more Republican than I estimated it was (38% Obama).

























CA-53

Incumbent: Susan Davis (D)
Previous District PVI: D+14
New District estimated Obama/McCain: 63% Obama, D+10
Current District 2008 (Est.) Demographics: 51% White, 30% Latino
New District Demographics: 46% White, 35% Latino

CA-53 stretches to the east, adding competitive areas from CA-52, so that CA-50 can stretch down further into Democratic San Diego. It becomes a bit more Republican in order to make CA-50 a bit more Democratic.

That’s all, folks!

If you liked this diary, do me a favor and contact your Representative and Senators and tell them to support strong Health Care Reform. A strong public option, no trigger, no opt-in, no opt-out. Strong subsidies to make the mandate affordable, open the exchange to everyone, and for crying out loud there’s no reason we should have to wait all the way until 2013 to have it go into effect!

Posey’s birther bill gets four more co-sponsors

Oh boy, the wingnut is strong in these folks.  Dave Weigel reports that Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL), (in)famous for his birther bill requiring documentation that a candidate for President was born in the U.S., has picked up four more co-sponsors, all Republicans (of course).  They are:

John R. Carter (TX-31)

John Culberson (TX-07)

Randy Neugebauer (TX-19)

John Campbell (CA-48)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (VA-06) had already signed on last month.  More after the fold….

Posey says those Congressmen came to him to co-sponsor the bill, that it wasn’t him begging them to do so.  And then he launched into an invective against Rachel Maddow.

You may recall that [Stephen] Colbert used the “F” word to describe on national TV a relationship my grandmother, bless her heart, deceased grandmother, must have had with an alligator to come up with the likes of me. [Keith] Olbermann named me the Worst Person in the World and angry woman Rachel Maddow has just trashed me on every show, and asked me to come on her show. You know, I won’t do it cause she’s got a lousy, low rated show, and I don’t want to give her the ratings, quite frankly. I’d love to go on and debate her and set the record straight.

Just so y’all remember, here‘s what Colbert had to say about Bill Posey.

And when Posey got upset at Colbert for doing so, he just brought upon more pain to himself with Colbert’s response.

Now, most of these people sit in VERY Republican districts where you probably have a significant chunk of the population that actually believe Obama was not really born here.  Per SSP’s presidential vote by CD, a whopping 72% of Neugebauer’s district voted for McCain, making it the 9th MOST Republican district in the country, in terms of the vote share Obama got.  So forget about defeating Neugebauer at the polls with his co-sponsorship, he might gain support from his constituents for doing this.  Sad, but true.

And Goodlatte (57%), Carter (58%), and Culberson (58%) also come from districts McCain easily won by double digits.  But Bill Posey himself may be in for a world of hurt, and should be.  McCain only beat Obama 51%-48% in Posey’s own FL-15 district.  Posey himself won 53%-42% over underfunded Democrat Dr. Stephen Blythe, outspending him by over an 8:1 margin.  With 48% of the district voting for Obama, I’m sure we could get enough of them upset at Posey for pulling this kind of shit to get them to the polls.  (Anyone know if Blythe wants to run again, or if there’s another Democrat waiting in the wings?)

What’s more, out here in California, Obama narrowly won Campbell’s district, 49.47% to 48.72%.  (Campbell himself easily won against Democrat Steve Young the last three elections.)  Irvine City Councilwoman Beth Krom has announced she’s running against Campbell, as Young is moving over to try his hand at winning the state assembly seat.

Ridicule is well deserved for these Republicans, for now.  But if we want to send a message, the best way would be kicking the vulnerable ones out of Congress at the ballot box in 2010.  Wanna repudiate the birthers?  Send Posey and Campbell packing next year.

California Voter Registration changes since the election

I’ve been saving the changes in registration differences in the competitive districts that I track in my regular registration number updates. Here I will show the changes in registration going from the last numbers before the 2008 election to the latest numbers released a few days ago. Here they are in tabulated form. And for the congressional districts, in addition to the 8 Obama-Republican districts, I tossed in CA-04, because the House race there was very close in spite of the considerable Republican advantage in registration and the presidential race, and CA-46, the district of McCain’s closest win of the 11 McCain districts and the only one that he won with less than 50%.

Cross-posted at Calitics.

Numbers are over the flip.

CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS

District 10-08 DIFF 02-09 DIFF 03-09 DIFF 05-09 DIFF
CA-03
R+2.19%
R+1.93%
R+1.91%
R+1.85%
CA-04
R+14.88%
R+14.68%
R+14.64%
R+14.69%
CA-24
R+6.40%
R+6.13%
R+6.04%
R+5.99%
CA-25
R+2.37%
R+1.68%
R+1.63%
R+1.52%
CA-26
R+5.57%
R+4.96%
R+4.92%
R+4.83%
CA-44
R+8.25%
R+7.52%
R+7.68%
R+7.77%
CA-45
R+4.60%
R+3.98%
R+3.99%
R+4.27%
CA-46
R+12.16%
R+11.79%
R+11.57%
R+11.47%
CA-48
R+16.12%
R+15.78%
R+15.46%
R+15.37%
CA-50
R+9.20%
R+8.90%
R+8.98%
R+8.87%

STATE SENATE DISTRICTS

District 10-08 DIFF 02-09 DIFF 03-09 DIFF 05-09 DIFF
SD-04
R+11.11%
R+11.05%
R+11.05%
R+11.10%
SD-12
D+13.92%
D+14.32%
D+14.37%
D+14.66%
SD-16
D+16.21%
D+16.53%
D+16.46%
D+16.49%
SD-18
R+16.01%
R+15.70%
R+15.67%
R+15.74%
SD-22
D+43.91%
D+44.21%
D+44.24%
D+44.35%
SD-24
D+31.96%
D+32.46%
D+32.39%
D+32.59%
SD-34
D+8.18%
D+8.63%
D+9.24%
D+9.39%
SD-36
R+17.49%
R+17.11%
R+17.19%
R+17.12%
SD-40
D+16.13%
D+16.84%
D+16.94%
D+17.07%

STATE ASSEMBLY DISTRICTS

District 10-08 DIFF 02-09 DIFF 03-09 DIFF 05-09 DIFF
AD-03
R+5.44%
R+5.37%
R+5.34%
R+5.45%
AD-05
R+1.23%
R+0.89%
R+0.87%
R+0.87%
AD-07
D+28.72%
D+29.11%
D+29.09%
D+29.09%
AD-09
D+37.61%
D+37.89%
D+37.93%
D+37.99%
AD-10
R+0.43%
R+0.11%
R+0.07%
D+0.01%
AD-15
D+3.96%
D+4.45%
D+4.51%
D+4.57%
AD-20
D+28.16%
D+28.43%
D+28.48%
D+28.44%
AD-21
D+20.26%
D+20.32%
D+20.39%
D+20.52%
AD-23
D+32.24%
D+32.39%
D+32.32%
D+32.29%
AD-25
R+5.51%
R+5.48%
R+5.46%
R+5.51%
AD-26
D+2.31%
D+2.76%
D+2.82%
D+2.83%
AD-30
D+9.81%
D+9.89%
D+9.65%
D+9.69%
AD-31
D+14.62%
D+15.12%
D+15.23%
D+15.30%
AD-33
R+4.81%
R+4.83%
R+4.86%
R+4.77%
AD-35
D+19.86%
D+20.26%
D+20.29%
D+20.34%
AD-36
R+0.05%
D+0.83%
D+0.91%
D+1.18%
AD-37
R+5.95%
R+5.62%
R+5.54%
R+5.47%
AD-38
R+3.76%
R+3.21%
R+3.18%
R+3.06%
AD-47
D+53.60%
D+53.67%
D+53.66%
D+53.67%
AD-50
D+45.03%
D+45.68%
D+45.71%
D+45.87%
AD-63
R+3.11%
R+2.59%
R+2.45%
R+2.37%
AD-64
R+5.98%
R+5.35%
R+5.72%
R+6.03%
AD-65
R+4.54%
R+3.92%
R+3.94%
R+4.82%
AD-68
R+9.27%
R+8.89%
R+8.43%
R+8.36%
AD-70
R+13.94%
R+13.61%
R+13.30%
R+13.16%
AD-74
R+11.11%
R+10.74%
R+10.79%
R+10.65%
AD-75
R+9.23%
R+9.07%
R+9.17%
R+9.08%
AD-76
D+14.91%
D+15.16%
D+15.07%
D+15.09%
AD-78
D+10.97%
D+11.50%
D+11.55%
D+11.62%
AD-80
D+7.82%
D+8.63%
D+8.84%
D+9.09%

Outlook for the California State Legislature in 2010 – May 2009 Special Election Edition

With the release of the new registration numbers, and a couple of special elections just around the corner, I now have updates for the open and/or competitive State Senate and State Assembly districts, as well as the eight Obama-Republican districts. The Secretary of State’s website has the presidential results by district, so I am including the presidential results in each district.

Breaking news: We now have a (albeit slight) registration advantage in AD-10!

And an edit: I am including CA-04 in the list because of McClintock’s less-than-1% win, even though the presidential race and registration gap are not particularly close.

Cross-posted at Calitics and Democracy for California.

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
CA-03
Dan Lungren
37.73%
39.58%
R+1.85
O+0.5
CA-04
Tom McClintock
31.14%
45.83%
R+14.69
M+10.1
CA-24
Elton Gallegly
35.83%
41.82%
R+5.99
O+2.8
CA-25
Buck McKeon
37.77%
39.29%
R+1.52
O+1.1
CA-26
David Dreier
35.67%
40.50%
R+4.83
O+4.0
CA-44
Ken Calvert
34.63%
42.40%
R+7.77
O+0.9
CA-45
Mary Bono Mack
37.81%
42.08%
R+4.27
O+4.6
CA-48
John Campbell
29.40%
44.77%
R+15.37
O+0.7
CA-50
Brian Bilbray
31.40%
40.27%
R+8.87
O+4.2

Competitive and/or open state legislature districts are over the flip…

Our current numbers in the Senate are 25 Democrats/15 Republicans, with winning 2 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3; and in the Assembly 51 Democrats/29 Republicans, with winning 3 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3.

SENATE

Republicans (4)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
SD-04
Sam Aanestad
33.02%
44.12%
R+11.09
M+11.8
SD-12
Jeff Denham
47.60%
32.94%
D+14.66
O+17.6
SD-18
Roy Ashburn
31.88%
47.62%
R+15.74
M+23.1
SD-36
Dennis Hollingsworth
28.94%
46.06%
R+17.12
M+14.2

Democrats (5)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
SD-16
Dean Florez
49.59%
33.10%
D+16.49
O+19.5
SD-22
Gilbert Cedillo
59.01%
14.66%
D+44.35
O+58.7
SD-24
Gloria Romero
53.63%
21.04%
D+32.59
O+41.3
SD-34
Lou Correa
42.84%
33.45%
D+9.39
O+16.8
SD-40
Denise Ducheny
46.57%
29.50%
D+17.07
O+25.7

ASSEMBLY

Republicans (16)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
AD-03
Dan Logue
34.80%
40.25%
R+5.45
M+1.6
AD-05
Roger Niello
37.90%
38.77%
R+0.87
O+4.2
AD-25
Tom Berryhill
36.81%
42.32%
R+5.51
M+7.9
AD-26
Bill Berryhill
42.06%
39.23%
D+2.82
O+4.4
AD-30
Danny Gilmore
46.28%
36.59%
D+9.69
O+3.9
AD-33
Sam Blakeslee
35.92%
40.69%
R+4.77
O+1.4
AD-36
Steve Knight
39.69%
38.51%
D+1.18
O+0.8
AD-37
Audra Strickland
35.87%
41.34%
R+5.47
O+3.7
AD-38
Cameron Smyth
36.85%
39.91%
R+3.06
O+4.9
AD-63
Bill Emmerson
38.00%
40.37%
R+2.37
O+4.1
AD-64
Brian Nestande
35.96%
41.99%
R+6.03
O+1.8
AD-65
Paul Cook
36.82%
41.64%
R+4.82
M+4.1
AD-68
Van Tran
32.80%
41.16%
R+8.36
M+2.9
AD-70
Chuck DeVore
30.20%
43.36%
R+13.16
O+3.9
AD-74
Martin Garrick
30.93%
41.58%
R+10.65
O+2.2
AD-75
Nathan Fletcher
30.72%
39.80%
R+9.08
O+4.1

Democrats (15)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
AD-07
Noreen Evans
52.80%
23.71%
D+29.09
O+43.3
AD-09
Dave Jones
56.66%
18.67%
D+37.99
O+49.0
AD-10
Alyson Huber
39.33%
39.32%
D+0.01
O+4.0
AD-15
Joan Buchanan
40.61%
36.04%
D+4.57
O+16.9
AD-20
Alberto Torrico
48.61%
20.17%
D+28.44
O+42.3
AD-21
Ira Ruskin
47.27%
26.75%
D+20.52
O+45.8
AD-23
Joe Coto
51.22%
18.93%
D+32.29
O+44.4
AD-31
Juan Arambula
49.08%
33.78%
D+15.80
O+26.1
AD-35
Pedro Nava
48.22%
27.88%
D+20.34
O+35.6
AD-47
Karen Bass
64.92%
11.25%
D+53.67
O+71.9
AD-50
Hector De La Torre
62.00%
16.13%
D+45.87
O+55.9
AD-76
Lori Saldaña
41.94%
26.85%
D+15.09
O+34.4
AD-78
Martin Block
43.08%
31.46%
D+11.62
O+21.8
AD-80
Manuel Perez
45.38%
36.29%
D+9.09
O+20.7

In the Senate, our obvious plan of action is to win the 12th and possibly the 4th if we have a strong candidate, and hold the 34th. In the Assembly, we have a lot of offense opportunities and of course, we will need to defend our 4 freshmen in vulnerable districts (Huber especially, Buchanan, Block, Perez). As for the potentially vulnerable Republican districts we should target, we should prioritize them like this:

(I) Open seats in Obama districts: 5, 33, 37, 63, 70

(II) Incumbents in Obama districts: 26, 30, 36, 38, 64, 74, 75

(III) Open seat in McCain district with small (<6%) registration edge: 25

(IV) Incumbents in McCain districts with small (<6%) registration edge: 3, 65

(V) Other open seat: 68

Outlook for the California State Legislature in 2010 – April 2009 edition

With the release of the new registration numbers, I now have updates for the open and/or competitive State Senate and State Assembly districts. The Secretary of State’s website has the presidential results by district, so I am including the presidential results in each districts.

I am also tacking on the eight districts that are our top targets in 2010: CA-03, CA-24, CA-25, CA-26, CA-44, CA-45, CA-48, and CA-50.

Cross-posted at Calitics and Democracy for California.

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
CA-03
Dan Lungren
37.72%
39.63%
R+1.91
O+0.5
CA-24
Elton Gallegly
35.84%
41.88%
R+6.04
O+2.8
CA-25
Buck McKeon
37.72%
39.35%
R+1.63
O+1.1
CA-26
David Dreier
35.64%
40.56%
R+4.92
O+4.0
CA-44
Ken Calvert
34.70%
42.38%
R+7.68
O+0.9
CA-45
Mary Bono Mack
37.97%
41.96%
R+3.99
O+4.6
CA-48
John Campbell
29.41%
44.87%
R+15.46
O+0.7
CA-50
Brian Bilbray
31.38%
40.36%
R+8.98
O+4.2

Competitive and/or open state legislature districts are over the flip…

Our current numbers in the Senate are 25 Democrats/15 Republicans, with winning 2 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3; and in the Assembly 51 Democrats/29 Republicans, with winning 3 GOP-held seats necessary for 2/3.

SENATE

Republicans (4)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
SD-04
Sam Aanestad
33.05%
44.10%
R+11.05
M+11.8
SD-12
Jeff Denham
47.46%
33.09%
D+14.37
O+17.6
SD-18
Roy Ashburn
31.91%
47.58%
R+15.67
M+23.1
SD-36
Dennis Hollingsworth
28.94%
46.13%
R+17.19
M+14.2

Democrats (5)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
SD-16
Dean Florez
49.61%
33.15%
D+16.46
O+19.5
SD-22
Gilbert Cedillo
58.98%
14.74%
D+44.24
O+58.7
SD-24
Gloria Romero
53.62%
21.13%
D+32.49
O+41.3
SD-34
Lou Correa
42.82%
33.58%
D+9.24
O+16.8
SD-40
Denise Ducheny
46.59%
29.65%
D+16.94
O+25.7

ASSEMBLY

Republicans (16)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
AD-03
Dan Logue
34.81%
40.15%
R+5.34
M+1.6
AD-05
Roger Niello
37.93%
38.80%
R+0.87
O+4.2
AD-25
Tom Berryhill
36.84%
42.30%
R+5.46
M+7.9
AD-26
Bill Berryhill
42.04%
39.22%
D+2.82
O+4.4
AD-30
Danny Gilmore
46.31%
36.66%
D+9.65
O+3.9
AD-33
Sam Blakeslee
35.91%
40.77%
R+4.86
O+1.4
AD-36
Steve Knight
39.56%
38.65%
D+0.91
O+0.8
AD-37
Audra Strickland
35.86%
41.40%
R+5.54
O+3.7
AD-38
Cameron Smyth
36.84%
40.02%
R+3.18
O+4.9
AD-63
Bill Emmerson
37.90%
40.35%
R+2.45
O+4.1
AD-64
Brian Nestande
36.11%
41.83%
R+5.72
O+1.8
AD-65
Paul Cook
37.14%
41.08%
R+3.94
M+4.1
AD-68
Van Tran
32.82%
41.25%
R+8.43
M+2.9
AD-70
Chuck DeVore
30.19%
43.49%
R+13.30
O+3.9
AD-74
Martin Garrick
30.89%
41.68%
R+10.79
O+2.2
AD-75
Nathan Fletcher
30.71%
39.88%
R+9.17
O+4.1

Democrats (15)

District Incumbent DEM GOP Margin 2008 Result
AD-07
Noreen Evans
52.81%
23.72%
D+29.09
O+43.3
AD-09
Dave Jones
56.64%
18.71%
D+37.93
O+49.0
AD-10
Alyson Huber
39.32%
39.39%
R+0.07
O+4.0
AD-11
Tom Torlakson
54.23%
22.06%
D+32.17
O+41.2
AD-15
Joan Buchanan
40.60%
36.09%
D+4.51
O+16.9
AD-20
Alberto Torrico
48.65%
20.17%
D+18.48
O+42.3
AD-21
Ira Ruskin
47.22%
26.83%
D+20.39
O+45.8
AD-23
Joe Coto
51.28%
18.96%
D+32.32
O+44.4
AD-31
Juan Arambula
49.07%
33.84%
D+15.23
O+26.1
AD-35
Pedro Nava
48.24%
27.95%
D+20.29
O+35.6
AD-47
Karen Bass
64.93%
11.27%
D+53.66
O+71.9
AD-50
Hector De La Torre
61.92%
16.21%
D+45.71
O+55.9
AD-76
Lori Saldaña
41.96%
26.89%
D+15.07
O+34.4
AD-78
Martin Block
43.09%
31.54%
D+11.55
O+21.8
AD-80
Manuel Perez
45.33%
36.49%
D+8.84
O+20.7

In the Senate, our obvious plan of action is to win the 12th and possibly the 4th if we have a strong candidate, and hold the 34th. In the Assembly, we have a lot of offense opportunities and of course, we will need to defend our 4 freshmen in vulnerable districts (Huber especially, Buchanan, Block, Perez). As for the potentially vulnerable Republican districts we should target, we should prioritize them like this:

(I) Open seats in Obama districts: 5, 33, 37, 63, 70

(II) Incumbents in Obama districts: 26, 30, 36, 38, 64, 74, 75

(III) Open seat in McCain district with small (<6%) registration edge: 25

(IV) Incumbents in McCain districts with small (<6%) registration edge: 3, 65

(V) Other open seat: 68