2010 California Gubernatorial: City by City results for Los Angeles County and suburbs

My analysis after the numbers

https://spreadsheets.google.co…

  Brown Whitman Total Votes D% R%
Agoura Hills 4037 4295 8332 48.45% 51.55%
Alhambra 11075 5267 16342 67.77% 32.23%
Arcadia 6012 8070 14082 42.69% 57.31%
Artesia 1618 1160 2778 58.24% 41.76%
Avalon 456 447 903 50.50% 49.50%
Azusa 5505 2914 8419 65.39% 34.61%
Baldwin Park 8403 2235 10638 78.99% 21.01%
Bell 3732 727 4459 83.70% 16.30%
Bell Gardens 3647 652 4299 84.83% 15.17%
Bellflower 8462 4924 13386 63.22% 36.78%
Beverly Hills 7156 5579 12735 56.19% 43.81%
Bradbury 117 247 364 32.14% 67.86%
Burbank 17818 12079 29897 59.60% 40.40%
Calabasas 4194 3988 8182 51.26% 48.74%
Carson 19010 5060 24070 78.98% 21.02%
Cerritos 8087 7109 15196 53.22% 46.78%
Claremont 8254 5426 13680 60.34% 39.66%
Commerce 2126 437 2563 82.95% 17.05%
Compton 14783 759 15542 95.12% 4.88%
Covina 6364 5409 11773 54.06% 45.94%
Cudahy 1932 337 2269 85.15% 14.85%
Culver City 11810 3759 15569 75.86% 24.14%
Diamond Bar 7271 7449 14720 49.40% 50.60%
Downey 14314 9269 23583 60.70% 39.30%
Duarte 3576 2125 5701 62.73% 37.27%
El Monte 9385 3175 12560 74.72% 25.28%
El Segundo 2925 3489 6414 45.60% 54.40%
Gardena 9995 2936 12931 77.29% 22.71%
Glendale 24362 16771 41133 59.23% 40.77%
Glendora 6582 10251 16833 39.10% 60.90%
Hawaiian Gardens 1186 393 1579 75.11% 24.89%
Hawthorne 11037 3260 14297 77.20% 22.80%
Hermosa Beach 3948 3907 7855 50.26% 49.74%
Hidden Hills 336 562 898 37.42% 62.58%
Huntington Park 5561 896 6457 86.12% 13.88%
Industry 19 31 50 38.00% 62.00%
Inglewood 22667 1810 24477 92.61% 7.39%
Irwindale 306 93 399 76.69% 23.31%
La Canada Flintridge 3744 5569 9313 40.20% 59.80%
La Habra Heights 739 1645 2384 31.00% 69.00%
La Mirada 6275 7474 13749 45.64% 54.36%
La Puente 4798 1290 6088 78.81% 21.19%
La Verne 4954 6523 11477 43.16% 56.84%
Lakewood 12636 11322 23958 52.74% 47.26%
Lancaster 14276 15632 29908 47.73% 52.27%
Lawndale 3610 1545 5155 70.03% 29.97%
Lomita 2836 2691 5527 51.31% 48.69%
Long Beach 68343 36700 105043 65.06% 34.94%
Los Angeles 590793 213305 804098 73.47% 26.53%
Lynwood 7739 1055 8794 88.00% 12.00%
Malibu 2919 2528 5447 53.59% 46.41%
Manhattan Beach 7162 8587 15749 45.48% 54.52%
Maywood 2723 391 3114 87.44% 12.56%
Monrovia 5984 5037 11021 54.30% 45.70%
Montebello 9631 2983 12614 76.35% 23.65%
Monterey Park 7632 4138 11770 64.84% 35.16%
Norwalk 13042 5862 18904 68.99% 31.01%
Palmdale 15179 12707 27886 54.43% 45.57%
Palos Verdes Estates 2329 4535 6864 33.93% 66.07%
Paramount 5627 1315 6942 81.06% 18.94%
Pasadena 28307 13897 42204 67.07% 32.93%
Pico Rivera 10777 2806 13583 79.34% 20.66%
Pomona 15825 6406 22231 71.18% 28.82%
Rancho Palos Verdes 7322 10508 17830 41.07% 58.93%
Redondo Beach 12730 11692 24422 52.13% 47.87%
Rolling Hills 238 784 1022 23.29% 76.71%
Rolling Hills Estates 1334 2432 3766 35.42% 64.58%
Rosemead 5144 2157 7301 70.46% 29.54%
San Dimas 4852 6357 11209 43.29% 56.71%
San Fernando 2855 828 3683 77.52% 22.48%
San Gabriel 4263 2852 7115 59.92% 40.08%
San Marino 1817 3266 5083 35.75% 64.25%
Santa Clarita 21113 31224 52337 40.34% 59.66%
Santa Fe Springs 2739 1203 3942 69.48% 30.52%
Santa Monica 26817 9164 35981 74.53% 25.47%
Sierra Madre 2759 2559 5318 51.88% 48.12%
Signal Hill 1871 1007 2878 65.01% 34.99%
South El Monte 2070 492 2562 80.80% 19.20%
South Gate 11093 2502 13595 81.60% 18.40%
South Pasadena 6456 3353 9809 65.82% 34.18%
Temple City 4318 3923 8241 52.40% 47.60%
Torrance 20974 23561 44535 47.10% 52.90%
Vernon 10 14 24 41.67% 58.33%
Walnut 4223 4021 8244 51.23% 48.77%
West Covina 14056 8930 22986 61.15% 38.85%
West Hollywood 11026 2457 13483 81.78% 18.22%
Westlake Village 1628 2308 3936 41.36% 58.64%
Whittier 12770 10409 23179 55.09% 44.91%
Unincorporated area of Los Angeles County 144758 78196 222954 64.93% 35.07%
           
Aliso Viejo 5363 8067 13430 39.93% 60.07%
Anaheim 29395 34529 63924 45.98% 54.02%
Brea 4546 8698 13244 34.32% 65.68%
Buena Park 8044 8476 16520 48.69% 51.31%
Costa Mesa 11389 15715 27104 42.02% 57.98%
Cypress 6129 8836 14965 40.96% 59.04%
Dana Point 4808 8555 13363 35.98% 64.02%
Fountain Valley 6960 12816 19776 35.19% 64.81%
Fullerton 14349 20155 34504 41.59% 58.41%
Garden Grove 16601 19682 36283 45.75% 54.25%
Huntington Beach 24769 43552 68321 36.25% 63.75%
Irvine 25659 30915 56574 45.35% 54.65%
La Habra 5750 7176 12926 44.48% 55.52%
La Palma 2109 2672 4781 44.11% 55.89%
Laguna Beach 5707 5259 10966 52.04% 47.96%
Laguna Hills 3703 6975 10678 34.68% 65.32%
Laguna Niguel 8450 16007 24457 34.55% 65.45%
Laguna Woods 4849 5096 9945 48.76% 51.24%
Lake Forest 8048 15745 23793 33.83% 66.17%
Los Alamitos 1607 2077 3684 43.62% 56.38%
Mission Viejo 11727 23818 35545 32.99% 67.01%
Newport Beach 10546 26983 37529 28.10% 71.90%
Orange 13839 24103 37942 36.47% 63.53%
Placentia 5344 9681 15025 35.57% 64.43%
Rancho Santa Margarita 4701 10550 15251 30.82% 69.18%
San Clemente 7829 16243 24072 32.52% 67.48%
San Juan Capistrano 3838 7681 11519 33.32% 66.68%
Santa Ana 27616 15471 43087 64.09% 35.91%
Seal Beach 5018 6999 12017 41.76% 58.24%
Stanton 3052 2837 5889 51.83% 48.17%
Tustin 6838 9770 16608 41.17% 58.83%
Villa Park 658 2552 3210 20.50% 79.50%
Westminster 9356 12705 22061 42.41% 57.59%
Yorba Linda 6889 19832 26721 25.78% 74.22%
Unincorporated area of Orange County 13177 29650 42827 30.77% 69.23%
           
Banning 3498 4219 7717 45.33% 54.67%
Beaumont 3413 4484 7897 43.22% 56.78%
Blythe 1739 881 2620 66.37% 33.63%
Calimesa 919 1635 2554 35.98% 64.02%
Canyon Lake 1000 2829 3829 26.12% 73.88%
Cathedral City 5475 4102 9577 57.17% 42.83%
Coachella 2806 530 3336 84.11% 15.89%
Corona 13285 17573 30858 43.05% 56.95%
Desert Hot Springs 2044 1657 3701 55.23% 44.77%
Eastvale 4222 4012 8234 51.28% 48.72%
Hemet 7235 10213 17448 41.47% 58.53%
Indian Wells 567 1764 2331 24.32% 75.68%
Indio 6854 6578 13432 51.03% 48.97%
La Quinta 4119 7699 11818 34.85% 65.15%
Lake Elsinore 3619 4314 7933 45.62% 54.38%
Menifee 7538 12231 19769 38.13% 61.87%
Moreno Valley 19145 11567 30712 62.34% 37.66%
Murrieta 8544 16493 25037 34.13% 65.87%
Norco 2100 4499 6599 31.82% 68.18%
Palm Desert 6043 9839 15882 38.05% 61.95%
Palm Springs 9848 5518 15366 64.09% 39.33%
Perris 4755 1911 6666 71.33% 28.67%
Rancho Mirage 2870 4269 7139 40.20% 59.80%
Riverside 31925 28034 59959 53.24% 46.76%
San Jacinto 3323 3493 6816 48.75% 51.25%
Temecula 7956 16088 24044 33.09% 66.91%
Wildomar 2601 4757 7358 35.35% 64.65%
Unincorporated area of Riverside County 38955 53470 92425 42.15% 57.85%
           
Adelanto 1739 1078 2817 61.73% 38.27%
Apple Valley 6237 12279 18516 33.68% 66.32%
Barstow 1880 1785 3665 51.30% 48.70%
Big Bear Lake 582 1356 1938 30.03% 69.97%
Chino 7556 8122 15678 48.19% 51.81%
Chino Hills 8771 12020 20791 42.19% 57.81%
Colton 5551 2454 8005 69.34% 30.66%
Fontana 18868 9922 28790 65.54% 34.46%
Grand Terrace 1664 1867 3531 47.13% 52.87%
Hesperia 6253 9419 15672 39.90% 60.10%
Highland 5746 5191 10937 52.54% 47.46%
Loma Linda 2119 2549 4668 45.39% 54.61%
Montclair 3549 1943 5492 64.62% 35.38%
Needles 536 489 1025 52.29% 47.71%
Ontario 15031 10177 25208 59.63% 40.37%
Rancho Cucamonga 19542 23661 43203 45.23% 54.77%
Redlands 9762 11635 21397 45.62% 54.38%
Rialto 10473 4035 14508 72.19% 27.81%
San Bernardino 19302 10638 29940 64.47% 35.53%
Twenty-nine Palms 1052 1604 2656 39.61% 60.39%
Upland 9207 11708 20915 44.02% 55.98%
Victorville 8747 8106 16853 51.90% 48.10%
Yucaipa 5284 9144 14428 36.62% 63.38%
Yucca Valley 2002 3504 5506 36.36% 63.64%
Unincorporated area of San Bernardino County 26125 37531 63656 41.04% 58.96%
           

 

I’ve opted to break down some of the larger counties and the ones that I know a lot about. Results by city are very telling. I’ve compared results just by the two way vote between Brown and Whitman, just to get a clearer look at how the both main parties match up head to head in each municipality. I got the numbers from the Secretary of State’s site, but I worked out the percentages myself with the help of Calc (please point any errors if you notice any).

Los Angeles County

As you can see, most of the usual pockets of Republican strength went to Whitman, with wealthier municipalities giving her the highest margins. The Senate results were almost identical, with only Lomita voting Democratic for Governor and Republican for Senate. The income polarization is very noticeable, the highest income place won by Brown was Beverly Hills. Malibu was probably the second highest income area Brown won, while Calabasas would likely rank behind it.

Orange County

Clearly, no surprise that most municipalities voted Republican and by sizable numbers. Laguna Beach, Santa Ana and Stanton voted for Brown. The lighter Republican voting areas aren’t that surprising, save for Laguna Woods, which is an exclusive retirement community. Again, income counts for a lot, since most of the municipalities won by Whitman are very high income and exclusive. Minority population growth has cause Republican numbers to erode, but it still is decisively Republican.

Riverside County

Whitman won the county overall, but well below the margins Republicans used to post here. Minority population growth has really boosted Democratic fortunes in Riverside County. Riverside proper and Moreno Valley have seen the biggest increase in minority population. Once again, the higher income communities are the darkest red, with exclusive Canyon Lake being the most heavily GOP voting.

San Bernardino County

Voted along the lines of Riverside County, but had a couple of split decisions. Barstow and Needles voted Democratic for Governor and Republican for Senate. I would imagine that Brown’s crossover appeal from his previous service helped him here a bit. Just like Riverside County, Whitman’s performance was well below what most Republicans in other states get in suburbs in good GOP years. Democrats have a solid foundation in Fontana, Ontario, Rialto and San Bernardino proper, which have grown a lot over time, with most of that growth being minorities who have left Los Angeles seeking better housing and work.

CA :: Cook Uncooked, Part Deux

The latest release of the Political Data Inc.  redistricting package allows us to look at the 2010 election results by contest.  So, using the congressional results from last election cycle I was able to construct election results as if the Cook plan had been implemented.

An obvious caveat is that these elections never happened.  Incumbents who had an easy ride in the existing lines would be fighting a different battle.  But it’s also true that the challengers – many of which were unimpressive and unfunded – would be cut from a different mold in a newly competitive seat.

Cook Uncooked Part Deux

Redistricting California (Part 4): Hypothetical Unicameral Legislature

In the last part of my redistricting California series, here is a map of what a 120-district unicameral legislature, the Senate and Assembly merged, might look like. I did this map at the same time as the Assembly map.

Majority-White: 54

Majority-Black: 1

Majority-Hispanic: 16

Majority-Minority: 49

Safe Dem: 56

Likely Dem: 13

Lean Dem: 6

Toss-Up: 10

Lean GOP: 14

Likely GOP: 11

Safe GOP: 10

Outer NorCal

Photobucket

LD-01: Humboldt County, Mendocino County, most of Sonoma County

Demographics: 78% White, 13% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 68%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+15)

LD-02: Most of southern Sonoma County

Demographics: 73% White, 18% Hispanic

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

LD-03: Marin County, Petaluma in Sonoma County

Demographics: 78% White, 12% Hispanic, 5% Asian

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

LD-04: Del Norte County, Siskiyou County, Trinity County, Shasta County, Modoc County, Lassen County

Demographics: 83% White, 7% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 60%, Obama 38% (SAFE GOP: R+14)

LD-05: Tehama County, Glenn County, Colusa County, most of Butte County

Demographics: 77% White, 15% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 51%, Obama 47% (LEAN GOP: R+5)

LD-06: Sutter County, Yuba County, Sierra County, Plumas County, most of Nevada County, Oroville in Butte County

Demographics: 72% White, 15% Hispanic, 6% Asian

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

LD-07: Lake County, Napa County, Vallejo in Solano County

Demographics: 58% White, 18% Hispanic, 10% Asian, 9% Black

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

LD-08: Yolo County, Vacaville and Winters in Solano County

Demographics: 60% White, 23% Hispanic, 8% Asian

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

LD-09: Most of Solano County, southern and eastern Sacramento County

Demographics: 60% White, 16% Hispanic, 10% Asian, 9% Black

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

LD-10: Southern Sacramento

Demographics: 40% White, 20% Asian, 19% Hispanic, 15% Black

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

LD-11: Central Sacramento

Demographics: 50% White, 18% Hispanic, 15% Asian, 11% Black

2008 President: Obama 69%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

LD-12: Northern Sacramento

Demographics: 61% White, 16% Hispanic, 9% Black, 8% Asian

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

LD-13: Placer County, part of southern Nevada County

Demographics: 81% White, 11% Hispanic

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

LD-14: Northwestern Sacramento County, southeastern Placer County

Demographics: 74% White, 10% Hispanic, 5% Black, 5% Asian

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

LD-15: El Dorado County, Citrus Heights and Folsom in Sacramento County

Demographics: 82% White, 10% Hispanic

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

San Francisco/Oakland/East Bay

Photobucket

LD-16: Western San Francisco

Demographics: 50% White, 36% Asian, 6% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 82%, McCain 16% (SAFE DEM: D+29)

LD-17: Northeastern San Francisco

Demographics: 49% White, 24% Asian, 17% Hispanic, 7% Black

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

LD-18: Southeastern San Francisco, Daly City

Demographics: 41% Asian, 23% Hispanic, 22% White, 11% Black

2008 President: Obama 82%, McCain 16% (SAFE DEM: D+29)

LD-19: Martinez, Richmond

Demographics: 39% White, 21% Hispanic, 19% BLack, 17% Asian

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

LD-20: Berkeley, Emeryville

Demographics: 49% White, 22% Black, 16% Asian, 9% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 91%, McCain 7% (SAFE DEM: D+38)

LD-21: Oakland

Demographics: 31% Black, 26% Hispanic, 20% White, 18% Asian

2008 President: Obama 87%, McCain 11% (SAFE DEM: D+34)

LD-22: South San Francisco, San Mateo, Pacifica

Demographics: 52% White, 21% Hispanic, 21% Asian

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 25% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

LD-23: Most of San Mateo County, small part of northwestern Santa Clara County

Demographics: 58% White, 22% Hispanic, 12% Asian

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

LD-24: Silicon Valley

Demographics: 52% White, 29% Asian, 13% Hispanic

2008 President: 75% Obama, 23% McCain (SAFE DEM: D+22)

LD-25: Pleasant Hill, Lafayette, Orinda

Demographics: 72% White, 12% Hispanic, 10% Asian

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

LD-26: Eastern Contra Costa County

Demographics: 56% White, 23% Hispanic, 9% Black, 8% Asian

2008 President: Obama 64%, McCain 35% (SAFE DEM: D+11)

LD-27: San Ramon, eastern Alameda County

Demographics: 76% White, 10% Asian, 9% Hispanic

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

LD-28: San Leandro

Demographics: 40% White, 26% Hispanic, 18% Asian, 10% Black

2008 President: Obama 75%, McCain 23% (SAFE DEM: D+22)

LD-29: Hayward, Union City, Fremont

Demographics: 35% White, 34% Asian, 20% Hispanic, 5% Black

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 25% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

LD-30: Milpitas, Santa Clara

Demographics: 42% White, 35% Asian, 16% Hispanic

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

LD-31: Northern San Jose

Demographics: 35% Hispanic, 29% Asian, 29% White

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 25% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

LD-32: Eastern San Jose

Demographics: 44% Hispanic, 33% Asian, 16% White

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

LD-33: Downtown San Jose

Demographics: 62% White, 16% Hispanic, 15% Asian

2008 President: Obama 67%, McCain 32% (SAFE DEM: D+14)

LD-34: Palo Alto, Cupertino, Monte Sereno, western Stanislaus County

Demographics: 62% White, 18% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 63%, McCain 35% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

LD-35: Santa Cruz County, Gilroy

Demographics: 61% White, 31% Hispanic

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

Central

Photobucket

LD-36: Turlock, Merced County

Demographics: 44% White, 42% Hispanic

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

LD-37: Lodi, Tracy, Escalon, Ripon

Demographics: 57% White, 27% Hispanic, 8% Asian

2008 President: McCain 50%, Obama 48% (LEAN GOP: R+4)

LD-38: Stockton

Demographics: 34% White, 33% Hispanic, 18% Asian, 10% Black

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

LD-39: Lathrop, Manteca, Modesto

Demographics: 58% White, 27% Hispanic, 6% Asian

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

LD-40: Eastern Central Valley, eastern Stanislaus County, eastern Madera County

Demographics: 74% White, 18% Hispanic

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

LD-41: Western Madera County, northern Fresno

Demographics: 51% White, 36% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: McCain 52%, Obama 47% (LIKELY GOP: R+6)

LD-42: Southern Fresno

Demographics: 47% Hispanic, 28% White, 13% Asian, 9% Black

2008 President: Obama 64%, McCain 35% (SAFE DEM: D+11)

LD-43: San Benito County, Salinas

Demographics: 48% Hispanic, 37% White, 7% Asian

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

LD-44: Most of Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties

Demographics: 70% White, 22% Hispanic

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

LD-46: Western Fresno County, eastern Fresno

Demographics: 45% Hispanic, 42% White, 6% Asian

2008 President: McCain 53%, Obama 46% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

LD-47: Eastern Fresno, Visalia

Demographics: 47% Hispanic, 45% White

2008 President: McCain 57%, Obama 41% (SAFE GOP: R+11)

LD-48: Most of Tulare, all of Inyo, Ridgecrest in Kern County

Demographics: 47% Hispanic, 44% White

2008 President: McCain 57%, Obama 41% (SAFE GOP: R+11)

LD-49: Kings County, northwestern Kern County

Demographics: 46% Hispanic, 40% White, 6% Black

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

Outer SoCal

Photobucket

LD-45: San Luis Obispo, Pismo Beach, Santa Maria, Lompoc

Demographics: 58% White, 32% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 49.1%, McCain 48.9% (LEAN GOP: R+3)

LD-50: Bakersfield

Demographics: 44% Hispanic, 42% White, 8% Black

2008 President: McCain 50%, Obama 49% (LEAN GOP: R+3)

LD-51: Central and eastern Kern County

Demographics: 59% White, 29% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 62%, Obama 37% (SAFE GOP: R+16)

LD-52: Santa Barbara, Ojai, Ventura

Demographics: 60% White, 32% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 69%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

LD-53: Northern and eastern Ventura County

Demographics: 72% White, 19% Hispanic

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

LD-55: Santa Clarita

Demographics: 63% White, 22% Hispanic, 6% Asian, 6% black

2008 President: McCain 50%, Obama 48% (LEAN GOP: R+4)

LD-56: Lancaster, Palmdale, Adelanto, Victorville

Demographics: 50% White, 31% Hispanic, 12% Black

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

LD-57: Hesperia, Victorville, Barstow, California City

Demographics: 61% White, 25% Hispanic, 7% Black

2008 President: McCain 57%, Obama 41% (SAFE GOP: R+11)

LD-92: Redlands, Yucaipa

Demographics: 68% White, 20% Hispanic, 5% Black

2008 President: McCain 55%, Obama 43% (SAFE GOP: R+10)

LD-107: Temecula, Desert Hot Springs

Demographics: 67% White, 23% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 51%, Obama 47% (LEAN GOP: R+5)

LD-108: Palm Springs, Palm Desert, Indio

Demographics: 50% Hispanic, 44% White

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

LD-120: Blythe, Imperial County, eastern San Diego County

Demographics: 56% Hispanic, 36% White

2008 President: McCain 51%, Obama 47% (LEAN GOP: R+5)

Los Angeles/San Bernardino

Photobucket

LD-54: Oxnard, Camarillo

Demographics: 50% White, 39% Hispanic, 6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 58%, McCain 41% (LEAN DEM: D+5)

LD-58: Western San Fernando Valley

Demographics: 52% White, 28% Hispanic, 13% Asian

2008 President: Obama 63%, McCain 35% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

LD-59: Southeastern San Fernando Valley

Demographics: 50% Hispanic, 33% White, 8% Asian

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 25% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

LD-60: San Fernando

Demographics: 57% Hispanic, 26% White, 9% Asian

2008 President: Obama 69%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

LD-61: Far southeastern San Fernando Valley

Demographics: 47% Hispanic, 37% White, 7% Asian, 5% Black

2008 President: Obama 75%, McCain 23% (SAFE DEM: D+22)

LD-62: Burbank, Glendale

Demographics: 53% White, 28% Hispanic, 11% Asian

2008 President: Obama 63%, McCain 35% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

LD-63: South Pasadena

Demographics: 46% Hispanic, 29% White, 17% Asian

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 25% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

LD-64: San Gabriel, El Monte, Baldwin Park

Demographics: 57% Hispanic, 28% Asian, 12% White

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

LD-65: South El Monte, Industry, La Habra Heights

Demographics: 56% Hispanic, 20% Asian, 19% White

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

LD-66: Covina, Walnut, Diamond Bar

Demographics: 41% Hispanic, 26% White, 25% Asian, 5% Black

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

LD-67: Port Hueneme, Malibu, Santa Monica

Demographics: 65% White, 22% Hispanic, 7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 69%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

LD-68: West Side L.A.

Demographics: 65% White, 15% Hispanic, 12% Asian

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

LD-69: Beverly Hills, West Hollywood

Demographics: 73% White, 10% Hispanic, 9% Asian

2008 President: Obama 75%, McCain 23% (SAFE DEM: D+22)

LD-70: Inglewood

Demographics: 47% Black, 35% Hispanic, 7% White, 7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 91%, McCain 7% (SAFE DEM: D+38)

LD-71: Culver City, Hawthorne

Demographics: 45% Hispanic, 26% Black, 16% White, 9% Asian

2008 President: Obama 82%, McCain 16% (SAFE DEM: D+29)

LD-72: South Central L.A., Compton

Demographics: 52% Black, 45% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 95%, McCain 4% (SAFE DEM: D+42)

LD-73: Downtown L.A. (yellow)

Demographics: 50% Hispanic, 25% White, 17% Asian

2008 President: Obama 82%, McCain 15% (SAFE DEM: D+29)

LD-74: Downtown L.A. (yellow green)

Demographics: 76% Hispanic, 9% Asian, 7% Black, 6% White

2008 President: Obama 82%, McCain 16% (SAFE DEM: D+29)

LD-75: Downtown L.A. (pink)

Demographics: 64% Hispanic, 17% Asian, 13% Black

2008 President: Obama 83%, McCain 15% (SAFE DEM: D+30)

LD-76: South Central, Vernon

Demographics: 74% Hispanic, 24% Black

2008 President: Obama 92%, McCain 7% (SAFE DEM: D+39)

LD-77: Commerce, Maywood, Bell

Demographics: 90% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 82%, McCain 16% (SAFE DEM: D+29)

LD-78: Montebello, Pico Rivera, Whittier

Demographics: 68% Hispanic, 16% Asian, 12% White

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

LD-79: El Segundo, Beach Cities

Demographics: 47% White, 25% Hispanic, 16% Asian, 8% Black

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

LD-80: Palos Verdes, Torrance

Demographics: 50% White, 24% Hispanic, 18% Asian

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

LD-81: Carson, part of Long Beach

Demographics: 46% Hispanic, 21% White, 15% Black, 15% Asian

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

LD-82: South Gate, Paramount, Lynwood

Demographics: 80% Hispanic, 10% Black, 5% White

2008 President: Obama 83%, McCain 15% (SAFE DEM: D+30)

LD-83: Downey, Bellflower, Signal Hill

Demographics: 43% Hispanic, 32% White, 11% Black, 11% Asian

2008 President: Obama 63%, McCain 35% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

LD-84: Artesia, Norwalk, Lakewood, La Mirada

Demographics: 43% Hispanic, 28% White, 21% Asian, 5% Black

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

LD-85: La Canada Flintridge, Pasadena

Demographics: 34% White, 30% Hispanic, 21% Asian, 11% Black

2008 President: Obama 69%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

LD-86: Monrovia, Glendora, San Dimas

Demographics: 45% White, 31% Hispanic, 16% Asian

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

LD-87: Claremont, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga

Demographics: 54% White, 28% Hispanic, 8% Black, 7% Asian

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

LD-88: Pomona, Montclair, Chino Hills

Demographics: 51% Hispanic, 27% White, 11% Asian, 8% Black

2008 President: Obama 60%, McCain 38% (LIKELY DEM: D+7)

LD-89: Chino, Ontario, Fontana

Demographics: 59% Hispanic, 25% White, 8% Black

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

LD-90: Rialto, Colton

Demographics: 56% Hispanic, 23% White, 14% Black

2008 President: Obama 69%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

LD-91: San Bernardino, Loma Linda, Grand Terrace

Demographics: 44% Hispanic, 32% White, 14% Black

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

LD-93: Calimesa, Beaumont, Banning

Demographics: 63% White, 27% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 53%, Obama 45% (LIKELY GOP: R+8)

LD-103: Corona, Norco

Demographics: 49% White, 37% Hispanic, 5% Asian, 5% Black

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

LD-104: Riverside

Demographics: 43% Hispanic, 42% White, 7% Black

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

LD-105: Moreno Valley

Demographics: 38% White, 35% Hispanic, 16% Black, 8% Asian

2008 President: Obama 61%, McCain 38% (LIKELY DEM: D+8)

LD-106: Perris, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta

Demographics: 58% White, 29% Hispanic, 6% Black

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

Orange County

LD-94: Long Beach, Seal Beach

Demographics: 50% White, 27% Hispanic, 12% Asian, 8% Black

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

LD-95: Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa

Demographics: 62% White, 21% Hispanic, 12% Asian

2008 President: McCain 51%, Obama 47% (LEAN GOP: R+5)

LD-96: Newport Beach, Irvine

Demographics: 74% White, 13% Asian, 9% Hispanic

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

LD-97: Anaheim

Demographics: 51% Hispanic, 30% White, 13% Asian

2008 President: Obama 55%, McCain 43% (TOSS-UP: D+2)

LD-98: Garden Grove, Stanton

Demographics: 33% Hispanic, 33% Asian, 30% White

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

LD-99: Santa Ana

Demographics: 78% Hispanic, 11% White, 7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 68%, McCain 30% (SAFE DEM: D+15)

LD-100: Cypress, Buena Park, Fullerton

Demographics: 45% White, 31% Hispanic, 19% Asian

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

LD-101: Placentia, Yorba Linda, Brea

Demographics: 63% White, 20% Hispanic, 12% Asian

2008 President: McCain 57%, Obama 41% (SAFE GOP: R+11)

LD-102: Orange, Tustin

Demographics: 55% White, 25% Hispanic, 15% Asian

2008 President: McCain 50%, Obama 48% (LEAN GOP: R+5)

LD-109: Rancho Santa Margarita, Laguna Niguel

Demographics: 74% White, 13% Hispanic, 9% Asian

2008 President: McCain 55%, Obama 44% (LIKELY GOP: R+9)

LD-110: San Juan Capistrano, Dana Point, San Clemente, Camp Pendleton, Oceanside

Demographics: 63% White, 26% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 55%, Obama 43% (SAFE GOP: R+10)

San Diego

Photobucket

LD-111: Vista, Carlsbad

Demographics: 63% White, 24% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: McCain 50%, Obama 48% (LEAN GOP: R+5)

LD-112: Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar

Demographics: 71% White, 13% Hispanic, 11% Asian

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

LD-113: San Diego (purple)

Demographics: 64% White, 19% Asian, 11% Hispanic

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

LD-114: San Diego (red), Lemon Grove

Demographics: 54% Whtie, 21% Hispanic, 11% Asian, 8% Black

2008 President: Obama 61%, McCain 38% (LIKELY DEM: D+8)

LD-115: San Diego (gold)

Demographics: 49% White, 32% Hispanic, 10% Black, 6% Asian

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

LD-116: Coronado, Imperial Beach, San Diego (teal)

Demographics: 41% Hispanic, 23% White, 17% Asian, 15% Black

2008 President: Obama 63%, McCain 36% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

LD-117: National City, Chula Vista

Demographics: 53% Hispanic, 27% White, 13% Asian

2008 President: Obama 61%, McCain 38% (LIKELY DEM: D+8)

LD-118: Santee, Poway

Demographics: 65% White, 26% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: McCain 57%, Obama 42% (SAFE GOP: R+11)

LD-119: El Cajon, La Mesa

Demographics: 71% White, 17% Hispanic, 5% Black

2008 President: McCain 53%, Obama 46% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

California’s Unusual Black Vote in 2010

By: Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

The black vote is one of the most reliably Democratic constituencies out there. Blacks commonly give Democratic candidates more than 90% of the vote; Democratic presidential candidates in 2000, 2004, and 2008 won 90%, 89%, and 95% of blacks respectively.

Blacks were as reliably Democratic as ever in the 2010 midterm elections. The black vote undoubtedly saved many a Democrat from defeat. Exit polls indicate that 89% of blacks nationwide voted for a Democratic congressman.

In California, however, blacks seemed to have been quite a bit more Republican than this.

More below.

The table below indicates the black support, according to exit polls, gained by Republicans in California’s statewide races:

2010   Black Vote Democratic Republican
Nationwide   (House of Representatives) 89 9
California   Governor 77 21
California   Senator 80 17

This can be graphed as below:

Photobucket

Now, a word of caution before analyzing these results: exit polls are notoriously unreliable. It is entirely possible that a bad sample skewed these results (although since it appears that the polls for the two California races were separately done, this may be less likely).

If the exit polls prove correct, however, California blacks voted significantly more Republican than blacks elsewhere in the nation. Generally speaking, it is quite a feat for a Republican to get more than 15% of the black vote.

Yet in 2010 Republican candidates in California did this twice. These were not especially impressive candidates; both lost pretty badly. Nevertheless, they got a degree of black support one would only expect Republican to pull during a landslide victory.

Whether this degree of black support is something recent, or  whether blacks in California have  always voted this way, is hard to  tell. According to exit polls, in 2008 they gave 94% of the vote to the Democratic candidate. In 2004 they gave 86% of the vote for Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer (this   was an election she won by a landslide). On the other hand, in 2004 a relatively paltry 70% voted for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides (who lost by a landslide). To round these numbers up, Senator John Kerry got 81% of the black vote that year.

Looking at the results does seem to indicate that blacks in California have been consistently more Republican than blacks nationwide, if not to the extent they were in 2010.

There are several reasons why this might have happened. Several years ago a blogger named dreaminonempty did a fascinating analysis, in which (s)he found that the blacks living in extremely non-black states tended to support Democrats less. For instance, blacks residing in states with higher black populations were more disapproving of President George W. Bush. This was the graph the blogger created:

Photobucket

Califonia is a state with a relatively low black population. Moreover, blacks in California are unusually integrated and getting more so. Places traditionally associated with the black community are rapidly diversifying. For instance, today Oakland is barely more than one-fourth black and Compton is less than one-third black.

California, then, constitutes a good example of dreaminonempty’s hypothesis. Its relatively racially integrated communities may have something to do with a less monolithically Democratic black vote.

Republicans should not start celebrating yet, however. Their relative strength amongst the black vote has very little to do with Republican success at appealing to minorities, and much more to do with the characteristics of California’s black community. If the party is ever to regain competitiveness in California, it must begin reaching out to minorities. Judging by the 2010 election results, this is still a challenge the party has yet to overcome.

Redistricting California (Part 3): State Assembly and BoE

Here are my maps of the California State Assembly and the Board of Equalization, the tax board. To make each BoE district, I colored over 20 Assembly districts.

Majority-White: 37

Majority-Black: 1

Majority-Hispanic: 11

Majority-Minority: 31

Safe Dem: 35

Likely Dem: 9

Lean Dem: 3

Toss-Up: 12

Lean GOP: 7

Likely GOP: 8

Safe GOP: 6

Outer NorCal

Photobucket

AD-01: Rural North Coast, northern Sonoma County

Demographics: 75% White, 15% Hispanic

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

AD-02: Marin County, southern Sonoma County

Demographics: 78% White, 13% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 77%, McCain 22% (SAFE DEM: D+24)

AD-03: Most of Sacramento Valley and Northern Mountains

Demographics: 79% White, 12% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 59%, Obama 38% (SAFE GOP: R+13)

AD-04: Rest of Sacramento Valley

Demographics: 75% White, 13% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: McCain 49%, Obama 48% (LEAN GOP: R+3)

AD-05: All of Lake, Napa, and Yolo Counties; northern Solano County

Demographics: 63% White, 22% Hispanic, 7% Asian

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

AD-06: Southern Solano County; most of suburban Sacramento

Demographics: 55% White, 16% Hispanic, 12% Asian, 12% Black

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

AD-07: Southern Sacramento

Demographics: 39% White, 20% Hispanic, 20% Asian, 14% Black

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

AD-08: Northern Sacramento

Demographics: 61% White, 16% Hispanic, 9% Black, 8% Asian

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

AD-09: Placer County, small parts of Sacramento and Nevada Counties

Demographics: 79% White, 11% Hispanic

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

AD-10: All of El Dorado, Alpine, and Mono Counties; northwestern Sacramento suburbs

Demographics: 79% White, 10% Hispanic

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

San Francisco

Photobucket

AD-11: Western San Francisco, Daly City

Demographics: 41% Asian, 39% White, 12% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 81%, McCain 17% (SAFE DEM: D+28)

AD-12: Eastern San Francisco

Demographics: 41% White, 26% Asian, 18% Hispanic, 10% Black

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

AD-13: Martinez, Richmond, Berkeley

Demographics: 44% White, 19% Black, 17% Hispanic, 16% Asian

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

AD-14: Oakland

Demographics: 30% Black, 28% White, 20% Hispanic, 18% Asian

2008 President: Obama 88%, McCain 10% (SAFE DEM: D+35)

AD-15: Most of San Mateo County

Demographics: 58% White, 19% Asian, 17% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 26% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

AD-16: Silicon Valley

Demographics: 51% White, 22% Asian, 20% Hispanic

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

AD-17: Northern Contra Costa County (Pittsburg, Concord, Antioch)

Demographics: 61% White, 19% Hispanic, 10% Asian, 6% Black

2008 President: Obama 68% McCain 30% (SAFE DEM: D+15)

AD-18: Southern Contra Costa County, eastern Alameda County

Demographics: 75% White, 10% Hispanic, 9% Asian

2008 President: Obama 59%, McCain 40% (LIKELY DEM: D+6)

AD-19: San Leandro, Hayward, Union City

Demographics: 37% White, 25% Hispanic, 24% Asian, 9% Black

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

AD-20: Newark, Milpitas

Demographics: 41% White, 34% Asian, 17% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 71%, McCain 27% (SAFE DEM: D+18)

AD-21: Eastern San Jose

Demographics: 35% Hispanic, 35% Asian, 22% White

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

AD-22: Western San Jose

Demographics: 49% White, 28% Hispanic, 16% Asian

2008 President: Obama 69%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

AD-23: Santa Cruz County, southwestern Santa Clara County

Demographics: 66% White, 18% Hispanic, 11% Asian

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

AD-24: Eastern Santa Clara County, western Stanislaus County, Merced County

Demographics: 45% White, 42% Hispanic, 6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 55%, McCain 43% (TOSS-UP: D+2)

Central

Photobucket

AD-25: Northern San Joaquin County (Lodi, Stockton)

Demographics: 42% White, 31% Hispanic, 15% Asian, 7% Black

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

AD-26: Southern San Joaquin County, Modesto

Demographics: 58% White, 27% Hispanic, 6% Asian

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

AD-27: Eastern Stanislaus County, eastern Central Valley

Demographics: 64% White, 27% Hispanic

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

AD-28: Fresno

Demographics: 39% Hispanic, 37% White, 11% Asian, 8% Black

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

AD-29: Most of Fresno County, all of Inyo County

Demographics: 46% White, 42% Hispanic, 5% Asian

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

AD-30: Reedley, all of Tulare County

Demographics: 51% Hispanic, 41% White

2008 President: McCain 56%, Obama 43% (SAFE GOP: R+10)

AD-31: Monterey and San Benito Counties

Demographics: 46% White, 41% Hispanic, 6% Asian

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

AD-32: San Luis Obispo County, Santa Maria, Lompoc

Demographics: 64% White, 27% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 50%, McCain 49% (LEAN GOP: R+3)

AD-33: Kings County, most of Kern County

Demographics: 45% Hispanic, 43% White, 5% Black

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

AD-34: Bakersfield

Demographics: 51% White, 34% Hispanic, 7% Black

2008 President: McCain 57%, Obama 41% (SAFE GOP: R+11)

Outer SoCal

Photobucket

AD-35: Santa Barbara, Ventura, Oxnard

Demographics: 52% White, 38% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 68%, McCain 31% (SAFE DEM: D+15)

AD-36: Most of Ventura County

Demographics: 69% White, 22% Hispanic, 5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 51%, McCain 48% (TOSS-UP: R+2)

AD-37: Santa Clarita, Lancaster, Palmdale

Demographics: 57% White, 26% Hispanic, 10% Black, 5% Asian

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

AD-38: California City, Barstow, Victorville, northeastern L.A. County

Demographics: 60% White, 26% Hispanic, 8% Black

2008 President: McCain 56%, Obama 42% (SAFE GOP: R+10)

AD-61: San Bernardino, Big Bear Lake, Twentynine Palms

Demographics: 46% White, 34% Hispanic, 12% Black

2008 President: Obama 53%, McCain 45% (TOSS-UP: EVEN)

AD-62: Redlands, Hemet

Demographics: 62% White, 26% Hispanic

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

AD-63: Corona, Moreno Valley

Demographics: 40% White, 39% Hispanic, 12% Black, 6% Asian

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

AD-64: Riverside, Norco

Demographics: 46% White, 38% Hispanic, 7% Black, 5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 53%, McCain 45% (TOSS-UP: D+1)

AD-65: Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Temecula

Demographics: 62% White, 26% Hispanic, 5% Black

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

AD-66: Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Indio

Demographics: 51% White, 42% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 53%, McCain 46% (TOSS-UP: EVEN)

AD-80: Blythe, Imperial County, eastern San Diego County

Demographics: 50% Hispanic, 42% White

2008 President: McCain 51%, Obama 47% (LEAN GOP: R+5)

Los Angeles/Orange County

Photobucket

AD-39: Western San Fernando Valley

Demographics: 52% White, 27% Hispanic, 13% Asian

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

AD-40: Eastern San Fernando Valley (San Fernando)

Demographics: 63% Hispanic, 22% White, 7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 25% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

AD-41: Burbank

Demographics: 45% Hispanic, 39% White, 8% Asian

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

AD-42: Glendale (Mike Gatto)

Demographics: 40% White, 37% Hispanic, 16% Asian

2008 President: Obama 68%, McCain 30% (SAFE DEM: D+15)

AD-43: San Gabriel, El Monte, Baldwin Park

Demographics: 55% Hispanic, 24% Asian, 17% White

2008 President: Obama 63%, McCain 35% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

AD-44: Covina, West Covina, Diamond Bar

Demographics: 47% Hispanic, 24% Asian, 22% White

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

AD-45: Santa Monica, Malibu, Port Hueneme

Demographics: 65% White, 21% Hispanic, 8% Asian

2008 President: Obama 71%, McCain 28% (SAFE DEM: D+18)

AD-46: Beverly Hills, West Hollywood

Demographics: 70% White, 12% Asian, 11% Hispanic

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

AD-47: Inglewood, Hawthorne

Demographics: 51% Black, 37% Hispanic, 6% White

2008 President: Obama 91%, McCain 8% (SAFE DEM: D+38)

AD-48: Culver City, Compton (I had to make this district snake around AD-47 to make that one majority-black)

Demographics: 47% Hispanic, 32% Black, 10% White, 8% Asian

2008 President: Obama 88%, McCain 11% (SAFE DEM: D+35)

AD-49: Downtown L.A.

Demographics: 53% Hispanic, 21% Asian, 18% White

2008 President: Obama 81%, McCain 17% (SAFE DEM: D+28)

AD-50: Downtown L.A.

Demographics: 74% Hispanic, 12% Black, 8% Asian, 5% White

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

AD-51: Vernon, Bell, Bell Gardens

Demographics: 80% Hispanic, 16% Black

2008 President: Obama 89%, McCain 10% (SAFE DEM: D+36)

AD-52: Monterey Park, Montebello, Whittier

Demographics: 74% Hispanic, 14% Asian

2008 President: Obama 73%, McCain 25% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

AD-53: Beach Cities, Torrance (Betsy Butler)

Demographics: 48% White, 24% Hispanic, 18% Hispanic, 6% Black

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

AD-54: Palos Verdes, Carson, part of Long Beach

Demographics: 40% Hispanic, 31% White, 14% Asian, 11% Black

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

AD-55: South Gate, Downey

Demographics: 69% Hispanic, 13% White, 10% Black, 6% Asian

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

AD-56: Lakewood, Bellflower, Norwalk

Demographics: 42% Hispanic, 31% White, 18% Asian, 6% Black

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

AD-57: La Canada Flintridge, Pasadena, South Pasadena, Monrovia

Demographics: 36% White, 29% Hispanic, 22% Asian, 9% Black

2008 President: Obama 65%, McCain 33% (SAFE DEM: D+12)

AD-58: Glendora, Claremont, Upland, Rancho Cucamonga

Demographics: 53% White, 30% Hispanic, 7% Asian, 6% Black

2008 President: Obama 50%, McCain 48% (TOSS-UP: R+3)

AD-59: Pomona, Chino, Montclair

Demographics: 53% Hispanic, 28% White, 9% Asian, 8% Black

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

AD-60: Ontario, Fontana, Rialto, Colton

Demographics: 59% Hispanic, 22% White, 12% Black

2008 President: Obama 69%, McCain 29% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

AD-67: Long Beach, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach

Demographics: 56% White, 23% Hispanic, 11% Asian, 6% Black

2008 President: Obama 53%, McCain 45% (TOSS-UP: D+1)

AD-68: Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Irvine, Laguna Hills, Laguna Beach

Demographics: 68% White, 15% Hispanic, 13% Asian

2008 President: Obama 51%, McCain 48% (TOSS-UP: R+2)

AD-69: Anaheim, Stanton, Garden Grove

Demographics: 43% Hispanic, 32% White, 20% Asian

2008 President: Obama 51%, McCain 48% (TOSS-UP: R+2)

AD-70: Santa Ana

Demographics: 65% Hispanic, 15% Asian, 15% White

2008 President: Obama 60%, McCain 38% (LIKELY DEM: D+7)

AD-71: Northern Orange County (Cypress, Buena Park, Brea, Fullerton)

Demographics: 50% White, 28% Hispanic, 16% Asian

2008 President: McCain 51%, Obama 47% (LEAN GOP: R+5)

AD-72: Yorba Linda, Orange, Tustin

Demographics: 59% White, 22% Hispanic, 15% Asian

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

AD-73: Rancho Santa Margarita, Laguna Niguel, San Juan Capistrano, Dana Point

Demographics: 74% White, 15% Hispanic, 7% Asian

2008 President: McCain 55%, Obama 44% (LIKELY GOP: R+9)

San Diego

Photobucket

AD-74: Camp Pendleton, Oceanside, Vista, Carlsbad

Demographics: 59% White, 27% Hispanic, 5% Asian, 5% Black

2008 President: McCain 51%, Obama 47% (LEAN GOP: R+4)

AD-75: Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar

Demographics: 66% White, 17% Asian, 11% Hispanic

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

AD-76: Northern San Diego, Lemon Grove

Demographics: 61% White, 18% Hispanic, 10% Asian, 7% Black

2008 President: Obama 60%, McCain 38% (LIKELY DEM: D+7)

AD-77: Southern San Diego

Demographics: 36% White, 35% Hispanic, 14% Black, 11% Asian

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

AD-78: Coronado Beach, National City, Chula Vista, Imperial Beach

Demographics: 49% Hispanic, 30% White, 13% Asian, 5% Black

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

AD-79: Poway, El Cajon, Santee, La Mesa

Demographics: 73% White, 15% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 56%, Obama 43% (SAFE GOP: R+10)

Board of Equalization

Photobucket

BOE-1: San Francisco and Sacramento Areas

Demographics: 51% White, 20% Hispanic, 17% Asian, 7% Black

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

BOE-2: Outer NorCal and Central

Demographics: 58% White, 29% Hispanic

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

BOE-3: Outer SoCal, Orange County, San Diego

Demographics: 49% White, 34% Hispanic, 9% Asian

2008 President: Obama 53%, McCain 46% (TOSS-UP: R+0)

BOE-4: Los Angeles

Demographics: 45% Hispanic, 29% White, 13% Asian, 10% Black

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

CA: Population by CD

The crown jewel of the 2010 Census is out: California. The nation’s largest state is, well, even larger than before, at 37,253,956, up from 33,871,648. Divide that out among 53 districts (it was the first time in ages that California didn’t gain a House seat, despite gaining more than 3 million residents… it gained at a rate close to the country as a whole), and you have a target of 702,905, which is up from about 639K in 2000.

It may not come as a surprise, but much of the state’s growth is Hispanic. Since 2000, the state’s Hispanic population grew 27.8%, while the state’s non-Hispanic population was almost stagnant, growing only 1.5%. (The Asian population grew 31.5%, but that’s a fairly small subset of the overall population.) In 2000, California was 46.7% non-Hispanic white and 32.4% Hispanic, but in 2010, it had drawn much closer: 40.1% non-Hispanic white and 37.6% Hispanic.

Looking at the table, you’ll notice that a large number of districts have moved from white pluralities to Hispanic pluralities over the last ten years: the Democratic-controlled 17th, 23rd, and 27th, and the Republican-controlled 21st, 44th, and 45th. (The latter two were also the state’s two fastest growing districts, both in Riverside County to the east of Los Angeles.) Two more GOP-held seats in the greater Los Angeles area are also dancing close to the edge of a Hispanic plurality: the 25th, and the Orange County-based 40th. Of course, that doesn’t presage an immediate change in voting patterns; given lower Hispanic voter participation rates and the fact that much of the Hispanic population is under 18, changes will be slow to happen. Case in point: the 20th, where incumbent Jim Costa had a close call in 2010 despite it being a 70% Hispanic district! (One other bit of trivia: Pete Stark’s 13th moved from a white plurality to an Asian plurality, the only Asian-plurality district outside of Hawaii.)

One other thing you’ll notice: despite the fact that California didn’t lose a seat, there is going to be substantial reconfiguration of districts, with boundaries moving from west to east. The Bay Area gained little population, and will need to give most of a seat to the Central Valley; likewise, Los Angeles County proper gained little, and will need to give most of a seat to the Inland Empire (San Bernardino and Riverside Counties). Although the Central Valley and Inland Empire tend to be Republican areas in general, most of the growth in those places has been Hispanic, to the extent that “new” seats are probably going to wind up being Hispanic VRA seats carved out of the general overlay of red; on the other hand, the Bay Area and LA proper are already Dem strongholds and have nothing but Dems to lose, so the overall effect is likely to be a wash. Of course, given that this is the first year that California switches to an ostensibly impartial commission, which has no compunction to preserve the incumbent protection intent of the 2000 map and may actually place a premium on compactness, we could see all manner of scrambling that goes well beyond what I’m describing.

While we aren’t going into as much detail as we did with Texas, we’re adding a few details to California that most states haven’t received: each district’s representative (as it’s well nigh impossible to keep track of which district number is what when there are 53 of them), and the district’s racial composition in both 2010 and 2000. The four categories expressed as overall percentages, left to right, are non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic African-American, non-Hispanic Asian, and Hispanic.




























































































































District Rep. Population Deviation 2010 Race 2000 Race
CA-01 Thompson (D) 704,012 1,107 63/2/6/24 71/1/4/18
CA-02 Herger (R) 708,596 5,691 70/1/4/19 76/1/4/14
CA-03 Lungren (R) 783,317 80,412 62/6/11/16 74/4/6/11
CA-04 McClintock (R) 774,261 71,356 78/1/4/12 84/1/2/9
CA-05 Matsui (D) 700,443 (2,462) 36/14/16/27 43/14/15/21
CA-06 Woolsey (D) 664,468 (38,437) 69/2/4/21 76/2/4/15
CA-07 Miller (D) 655,708 (47,197) 35/15/15/30 43/16/13/21
CA-08 Pelosi (D) 666,827 (36,078) 42/6/31/16 43/8/29/16
CA-09 Lee (D) 648,766 (54,139) 35/20/18/22 35/26/15/19
CA-10 Garamendi (D) 714,750 11,845 53/7/13/21 65/6/9/15
CA-11 McNerney (D) 796,753 93,848 50/5/14/26 64/3/9/20
CA-12 Speier (D) 651,322 (51,583) 41/2/33/18 48/2/29/16
CA-13 Stark (D) 665,318 (37,587) 26/7/36/25 38/6/28/21
CA-14 Eshoo (D) 653,935 (48,970) 51/2/22/21 60/3/16/17
CA-15 Honda (D) 677,605 (25,300) 37/2/36/21 47/2/29/17
CA-16 Lofgren (D) 676,880 (26,025) 26/3/28/40 32/3/23/38
CA-17 Farr (D) 664,240 (38,665) 39/2/5/50 46/3/5/43
CA-18 Cardoza (D) 723,607 20,702 29/6/9/53 39/5/9/42
CA-19 Denham (R) 757,337 54,432 50/4/5/37 60/3/4/28
CA-20 Costa (D) 744,350 41,445 16/6/5/70 21/7/6/63
CA-21 Nunes (R) 784,176 81,271 37/2/7/51 46/2/5/43
CA-22 McCarthy (R) 797,084 94,179 54/6/4/32 67/5/3/21
CA-23 Capps (D) 695,404 (7,501) 41/2/5/49 49/2/5/42
CA-24 Gallegly (R) 681,622 (21,283) 60/2/6/29 68/2/4/22
CA-25 McKeon (R) 844,320 141,415 42/10/6/39 57/8/4/27
CA-26 Dreier (R) 691,452 (11,453) 43/5/19/31 52/4/15/24
CA-27 Sherman (D) 684,496 (18,409) 38/4/12/42 45/4/11/36
CA-28 Berman (D) 660,194 (42,711) 30/3/7/58 31/4/6/56
CA-29 Schiff (D) 642,138 (60,767) 40/5/28/25 39/6/24/26
CA-30 Waxman (D) 662,319 (40,586) 72/3/11/10 76/2/9/8
CA-31 Becerra (D) 611,336 (91,569) 11/4/15/68 10/4/14/70
CA-32 Chu (D) 642,236 (60,669) 10/2/22/64 15/3/18/62
CA-33 Bass (D) 637,122 (65,783) 22/25/13/37 20/30/12/35
CA-34 Roybal-Allard (D) 654,303 (48,602) 9/5/6/79 11/4/5/77
CA-35 Waters (D) 662,413 (40,492) 9/28/6/54 10/34/6/47
CA-36 Vacant 659,385 (43,520) 44/4/16/32 48/4/13/30
CA-37 Richardson (D) 648,847 (54,058) 14/21/12/49 17/25/11/43
CA-38 Napolitano (D) 641,410 (61,495) 9/3/11/75 13/4/10/71
CA-39 Sanchez, Li. (D) 643,115 (59,790) 16/5/10/66 21/6/9/63
CA-40 Royce (R) 665,653 (37,252) 39/2/20/35 49/2/16/30
CA-41 Lewis (R) 797,133 94,228 51/6/5/35 63/5/4/23
CA-42 Miller (R) 667,638 (35,267) 45/2/20/29 54/3/16/24
CA-43 Baca (D) 735,581 32,676 15/10/4/69 23/12/3/58
CA-44 Calvert (R) 844,756 141,851 41/5/8/43 51/5/5/35
CA-45 Bono Mack (R) 914,209 211,304 41/6/4/45 50/6/3/38
CA-46 Rohrabacher (R) 648,663 (54,242) 56/2/19/20 63/1/15/17
CA-47 Sanchez, Lo. (D) 631,422 (71,483) 12/1/17/68 17/1/14/65
CA-48 Campbell (R) 727,833 24,928 58/1/19/18 68/1/13/15
CA-49 Issa (R) 797,428 94,523 48/4/5/39 58/5/3/29
CA-50 Bilbray (R) 753,135 50,230 59/2/14/22 66/2/10/19
CA-51 Filner (D) 757,891 54,986 15/7/12/62 21/9/12/53
CA-52 Hunter (R) 673,893 (29,012) 64/4/7/19 72/4/5/14
CA-53 Davis (D) 662,854 (40,051) 48/6/10/32 51/7/8/29
Total: 37,253,956 40/6/13/38 47/6/11/32

Redistricting California (Part 2): State Senate

Here is my attempt at redistricting the California State Senate. With over 936,000 people per district, satisfying communities of interest becomes a bit more challenging. Here are the districts I ended up drawing.

Majority-White: 22

Majority-Hispanic: 8

Majority-Minority: 10

Safe Dem: 19

Likely Dem: 1

Lean Dem: 3

Toss-Up: 7

Lean GOP: 3

Likely GOP: 6

Safe GOP: 1

Outer NorCal

Photobucket

SD-01: Coastal NorCal (Previously SD-02) (Noreen Evans)

Description: Similar shape to the old district, plus added Del Norte County and the westernmost part of Solano to satisfy district size

Demographics: 68.4% White, 16.1% Hispanic, 5.6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 69.1%, McCain 28.5% (SAFE DEM: D+16)

SD-02: Central Valley and Yolo County (Previously SD-04) (Doug LaMalfa and Lois Wolk unless she moves to the new SD-05)

Description: Similar to previous configuration only I added Yolo County to satisfy population size. Lois Wolk (from Davis and currently in SD-05) would be put into this district and would lose to LaMalfa unless she moved to the new SD-05.

Demographics: 71.8% White, 16.1% Hispanic, 5.5% Asian

2008 President: McCain 49.9%, Obama 47.9% (LEAN GOP: R+4)

SD-03: All of Marin, eastern San Francisco, and SE Sonoma (Mark Leno)

Demographics: 56.4% White, 17.8% Asian, 15.6% Hispanic, 6.7% Black

2008 President: Obama 82.2%, McCain 15.8% (SAFE DEM: D+29)

SD-04: Mountain counties along most of the Nevada border plus some Sacramento suburbs (Previously SD-01) (Ted Gaines)

Demographics: 80.8% White, 10.0% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 54.1%, Obama 44.9% (LIKELY GOP: R+8)

SD-05: Most of Solano and Sacramento, NW San Joaquin (Lois Wolk if she moves here from SD-02)

Description: Removed Yolo and included more of Sacramento

Demographics: 59.5% White, 18.2% Hispanic, 10.2% Asian, 7.2% Black

2008 President: Obama 53.4%, McCain 44.9% (TOSS-UP: EVEN)

SD-06: Sacramento and some inner suburbs (Darrell Steinberg)

Demographics: 50.3% White, 17.9% Hispanic, 14.2% Asian, 11.8% Black

2008 President: Obama 65.1%, McCain 33.0% (SAFE DEM: D+12)

San Francisco Bay Area

Photobucket

SD-07: Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond, Martinez (Previously SD-09) (Loni Hancock)

Demographics: 36.0% White, 24.2% Black, 18.5% Hispanic, 16.7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 86.7%, McCain 11.3% (SAFE DEM: D+33)

SD-08: Western half of San Francisco, most of San Mateo (Leland Yee)

Demographics: 46.4% White, 27.6% Asian, 18.3% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 75.4%, McCain 22.8% (SAFE DEM: D+22)

SD-09: Inland Alameda and Contra Costa (Previously SD-07) (Mark DeSaulnier)

Demographics: 67.9% White, 14.5% Hispanic, 9.3% Asian

2008 President: Obama 63.0%, McCain 35.3% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

SD-10: Western Alameda County and Milpitas in Santa Clara County (Ellen Corbett)

Demographics: 32.9% White, 31.4% Asian, 24.6% Hispanic, 6.1% Black

2008 President: Obama 72.7%, McCain 25.4% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

SD-11: Silicon Valley and Santa Cruz County (Joe Simitian)

Demographics: 58.4% White, 20.2% Asian, 15.9% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 73.7%, McCain 24.2% (SAFE DEM: D+21)

SD-12: San Jose and part of Stanislaus County (Previously SD-13) (Elaine Alquist)

Demographics: 42.4% White, 31.0% Hispanic, 19.6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 67.4%, McCain 30.9% (SAFE DEM: D+14)

SD-13: Stockton, Modesto, Merced (Previously SD-12) (Anthony Cannella)

Demographics: 50.0% White, 34.1% Hispanic, 6.8% Asian

2008 President: Obama 52.1%, McCain 46.2% (TOSS-UP: R+1)

Central

Photobucket

SD-14: Eastern Central Valley and northern half of Fresno (Tom Berryhill)

Demographics: 57.9% White, 28.7% Hispanic, 5.6% Asian

2008 President: McCain 53.6%, Obama 44.7% (LIKELY GOP: R+8)

SD-15: Central Coast (Sam Blakeslee)

Description: Still a Central Coast-centric district, only I removed Santa Cruz, put Monterey completely within the district, and stretched a little further into Santa Barbara

Demographics: 55.1% White, 33.9% Hispanic

2008 President: Obama 57.0%, McCain 41.0% (LEAN DEM: D+4)

SD-16: Western Central Valley (Michael Rubio)

Description: Did some tweaking to keep it sufficiently Hispanic to satisfy the VRA

Demographics: 60.1% Hispanic, 24.6% White, 5.9% Asian, 5.8% Black

2008 President: Obama 55.6%, McCain 42.8% (TOSS-UP: D+2.5)

SD-17: Inyo County, Tulare, Bakersfield (Previously SD-18) (Jean Fuller)

Demographics: 57.0% White, 32.1% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 60.8%, Obama 37.4% (SAFE GOP: R+15)

SD-18: Remainder of Santa Barbara and most of Ventura (Previously SD-19) (Tony Strickland)

Description: This time I was able to keep Thousand Oaks and Simi Valley in the same district and not go over in population

Demographics: 58.5% White, 31.0% Hispanic, 5.5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 59.3%, McCain 38.9% (LEAN DEM: D+6)

SD-19: Antelope Valley, keeping Lancaster and Palmdale together (Previously SD-17) (Sharon Runner)

Demographics: 54.1% White, 27.2% Hispanic, 8.2% Asian, 6.8% Black

2008 President: Obama 53.3%, McCain 44.6% (TOSS-UP: EVEN)

Los Angeles/Orange County

Photobucket

SD-20: Hispanic side of the San Fernando Valley (Alex Padilla)

Demographics: 54.2% Hispanic, 30.4% White, 6.9% Asian

2008 President: Obama 73.2%, McCain 24.7% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

SD-21: Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena (Carol Liu)

Demographics: 37.2% White, 32.8% Hispanic, 20.0% Asian, 5.2% Black

2008 President: Obama 67.3%, McCain 30.6% (SAFE DEM: D+14)

SD-22: From Monterey Park to Diamond Bar (Kevin De Leon)

Demographics: 53.9% Hispanic, 26.0% Asian, 14.8% White

2008 President: Obama 64.9%, McCain 33.2% (SAFE DEM: D+12)

SD-23: West Side L.A. without the Ventura portion (Fran Pavley)

Demographics: 70.4% White, 13.0% Hispanic, 9.4% Asian

2008 President: Obama 72.9%, McCain 25.4% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

SD-24: South Central: Culver City, Inglewood, Compton (Previously parts of SD-25 and 26) (Rod Wright) (Curren Price)

Description: Due to demographic trends, it looks like the black populations of the current SD-25 and 26 will be merged into this district, which means Curren Price and Rod Wright will likely be in the same district.

Demographics: 41.8% Hispanic, 41.7% Black, 7.9% White, 5.8% Asian

2008 President: Obama 89.7%, McCain 9.1% (SAFE DEM: D+37)

SD-25: South Central (Previously parts of SD-25 and 26)

Description: Here I took the Hispanic parts of the current SD-25 and 26. Either of Wright or Price may run here, but an Hispanic candidate is far and away the favorite here

Demographics: 61.4% Hispanic, 14.0% Black, 11.4% Asian, 10.4% White

2008 President: Obama 84.2%, McCain 13.8% (SAFE DEM: D+31)

SD-26: Downtown L.A., Whittier, Pico Rivera (Previously SD-24) (Probably Ed Hernandez)

Description: Hernandez’s home is in the new SD-22, though he may move and run here.

Demographics: 79.0% Hispanic, 11.4% White, 5.6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 73.1%, McCain 24.8% (SAFE DEM: D+20)

SD-27: Beach Cities, Carson, and Palos Verdes Peninsula (Previously SD-28) (Ted Lieu)

Demographics: 39.3% White, 31.7% Hispanic, 16.4% Asian, 8.9% Black

2008 President: Obama 62.0%, McCain 36.0% (LIKELY DEM: D+9)

SD-28: South Gate, Norwalk, Artesia, part of Long Beach (Previously parts of SD-27 and SD-30) (possibly Alan Lowenthal and Ron Calderon)

Description: I shifted Long Beach to the coastal OC district and found that I had too many people in that one, so I shifted part of Long Beach into this district. Part of Lowenthal’s and Calderon’s districts are put here, so they may face a primary unless one decides to retire.

Demographics: 55.7% Hispanic, 18.2% White, 12.3% Asian, 10.9% Black

2008 President: Obama 70.9%, McCain 27.0% (SAFE DEM: D+18)

SD-29: Northern L.A. suburbs (Previously parts of SD-29 and SD-31) (Bob Dutton and Bob Huff?)

Description: In L.A. and San Bern Counties to satisfy population size, from Arcadia to my hometown Rancho Cucamonga. Huff’s home in Diamond Bar was shifted to the 22nd so he may move here.

Demographics: 43.8% White, 34.3% Hispanic, 9.3% Asian, 8.9% Black

2008 President: Obama 54.2%, McCain 43.8% (TOSS-UP: D+1)

SD-30: Fontana, Ontario, Chino, Montclair, Pomona (Previously SD-32) (Gloria Negrete-McLeod)

Demographics: 55.7% Hispanic, 25.0% White, 9.9% Black, 6.2% Asian

2008 President: Obama 63.7%, McCain 34.5% (SAFE DEM: D+10)

SD-31: Most of San Bernardino and in Riverside (Open)

Demographics: 64.2% White, 23.9% Hispanic, 5.2% Black

2008 President: McCain 55.2%, Obama 42.6% (LIKELY GOP: R+9)

SD-32: Coastal Orange County and part of Long Beach (Previously SD-35 and part of SD-27) (Tom Harman and Alan Lowenthal?)

Demographics: 69.3% White, 13.5% Hispanic, 12.6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 49.5%, McCain 48.6% (LEAN GOP: R+4)

SD-33: Garden Grove, Anaheim, Santa Ana (Previously SD-34) (Lou Correa)

Demographics: 54.2% Hispanic, 23.5% White, 17.5% Asian

2008 President: Obama 54.6%, McCain 43.5% (TOSS-UP: D+1)

SD-34: Inland Orange County (Previously SD-33) (Mimi Walters)

Demographics: 53.7% White, 27.2% Hispanic, 13.9% Asian

2008 President: McCain 53.1%, Obama 45.0% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

SD-35: Riverside, Norco, Moreno Valley, Corona (Previously part of SD-37) (Open)

Description: Rapid growth in Riverside County led to this district being excised off the eastern end of the old SD-37

Demographics: 43.0% White, 38.3% Hispanic, 9.2% Black, 5.6% Asian

2008 President: Obama 55.4%, McCain 42.7% (TOSS-UP: D+2)

Outer SoCal and San Diego

Photobucket

Photobucket

SD-36: Most of the rest of Riverside County (Previously SD-37) (Bill Emmerson)

Demographics: 53.7% White, 36.9% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 49.6%, Obama 48.8% (LEAN GOP: R+3)

SD-37: Temecula, Southern OC, NW San Diego County to Carlsbad (Previously SD-36) (Joel Anderson?)

Demographics: 66.4% White, 21.4% Hispanic, 5.6% Asian

2008 President: McCain 53.5%, Obama 44.7% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

SD-38: Imperial County and as much of Eastern San Diego as could fit (Previously SD-37 and SD-40) (Mark Wyland)

Demographics: 57.8% White, 31.2% Hispanic

2008 President: McCain 53.2%, Obama 45.1% (LIKELY GOP: R+7)

SD-39: Northern San Diego (Christine Kehoe)

Description: Northern half of San Diego, Solana Beach, Encinitas, Del Mar, Lemon Grove

Demographics: 63.2% White, 14.9% Hispanic, 13.7% Asian

2008 President: Obama 56.9%, McCain 41.4% (LEAN DEM: D+4)

SD-40: Southern San Diego (Previously part of SD-39) (Juan Vargas)

Description: Southern half of San Diego, Coronado, National City, Chula Vista, Imperial Beach

Demographics: 42.4% Hispanic, 32.5% White, 12.0% Asian, 9.4% Black

2008 President: Obama 66.3%, McCain 32.0% (SAFE DEM: D+13)

California Redistricting: The Democrats’ Proposal

Cross posted on my blog http://frogandturtle.blogspot…. which you should visit for more election analysis and redistricting maps.

Before November 2nd 2010, it appeared that Democrats would control the redistricting process because most polls suggested Jerry Brown (D) would become Governor. Brown did win and the Democrats retained their majorities in the state legislature. They, however, lost control of the redistricting process. The voters passed Proposition 20 which transferred the redistricting power from the state legislature to a 14 member commission compromised of 5 Democrats, 5 Republicans and 4 independents. The commission must draw districts according to communities of interest which are similar communities based on the residents’ ethnicities, location and income. Also, at least three members of each party must approve the map before it takes effect. Even if Democrats do not control redistricting the way they used to, they will certainly propose some maps to the committee that will protect Democratic incumbents and eliminate a few Republicans who are in gerrymandered districts. Although the Democrats crafted the 2002 map as a bipartisan plan, the lines resemble a Republican gerrymander. For example, San Bernardino and Riverside County both cast narrow majorities for Obama and have about 5 districts between them. A Democrat only holds one of those districts. The Democrat is Joe Baca (D) but his district does not even touch Riverside County. So Riverside County which voted for Obama and has enough people for nearly three districts does not even have a Democratic representative. Also, Orange County voted for McCain by three points and has around 3 million people, enough population for almost five districts. How many Democratic districts cover at least part of Orange County? The answer is only one: the 47th district represented by Loretta Sanchez (D) which covers Santa Ana and Anaheim. Although Democrats worry that the independent commission will carve up districts leaving Democratic incumbents with no familiar territory, Democrats should not be too worried. The commission likely will weaken many Republicans too.

This leads to why I am drawing this map and it is because I am predicting what the Democrats will propose to the commission. Although the commission makes the final decision, both parties will draw up proposals suggesting what the commission should do. For the Democrats, their proposal needs to protect their incumbents, create more opportunities in the Inland Empire and Central Valley while not drawing convoluted lines. Also, my proposal respects the VRA which requires a certain number of minority majority districts in order to ensure minorities are not underrepresented in the House. For example, I made the 15th and 32nd districts with Asian representatives more Asian. I also created three new districts designed to elect Hispanics because California’s Hispanic population is growing rapidly and will need representation. Also, California’s Hispanic population is 36% and there are only 8 Hispanic representatives in 53 congressional districts. The problem is that Hispanic turnout rates are low so districts with a Hispanic percentage of 51% will not have enough Hispanic voters to elect a Hispanic representative. If the district is Democratic but has Republican white voters though, there can be enough Hispanics in the Democratic primary to elect a Hispanic candidate. Some of my districts have low Hispanic populations but the population numbers are from 10 years ago so the Hispanic population should be larger. I also created 29 Safe Democratic seats, 5 Likely Democratic seats, 3 lean Democratic seats, 2 Toss Up seats, 2 Lean Republican seats, 2 Likely Republican seats (these could be competitive in a few years if demographic trends continue) and 10 Safe Republican seats. Safe represents a likely 20%+ win for the listed party, likely represents a likely 10%-19% win, lean represents a likely 5%-9% win and tossup represents a likely 0%-4% win. I wanted to create more seats for the Democrats but I did not want convoluted lines because the commission will reject those. Anyway, here are some helpful links and the maps:

Current maps of California’s congressional districts: http://www.nationalatlas.gov/p…

A few notes: if you want a better picture of the maps, click on them. Also, the demographics are from the 2000 census (2010 data is not available yet.) Old Demographics means the demographics of the old districts. “Change” represents how the partisan makeup of the district is compared to the old lines.  

Photobucket

Northern California

California’s 1st Congressional District Mike Thompson (D)

Obama 190,394 64%, McCain 101,225 34%

Change: McCain +4

Demographics: 19% Hispanic, 69% White

Old Demographics: 17% Hispanic, 71% White

Communities of Interest: Eureka, Clear Lake, Napa

Status: Safe Democratic

Mike Thompson’s district becomes a few points more Republican with the loss of some Sonoma County towns and the addition of Republican Colusa and Glenn Counties. Those changes are not significant population wise and the Democratic counties of Yolo, Napa, Sonoma, Mendocino and Humboldt keep this district safe for Thompson.

California’s 2nd Congressional District Wally Herger (R)

Obama 123,563 42%, McCain 164,567 56%

Change: McCain +3

Demographics: 12% Hispanic, 78% White

Old Demographics: 14% Hispanic, 76% White

Communities of Interest: Redding, Chico, Yuba City

Status: Safe Republican

The district undergoes some geographical changes but the politics and the demographics of the district do not change much. The district loses Trinity, Colusa and Glenn Counties to the 1st but picks up Modoc, Lassen, Plumas and Sierra Counties to the east. Those counties make the district a bit more Republican but it was already safe for its representative who called a right wing terrorist a “Great American.” It also remains compact.

Photobucket

Sacramento Area

California’s 3rd Congressional District Dan Lungren (R)

Obama 144,028 51%, McCain 135,025 47%

Change: Obama +4

Demographics: 6% African American, 7% Asian, 11% Hispanic, 71% White

Old Demographics: 4% African American, 6% Asian, 10% Hispanic, 74% White

Communities of Interest: Citrus Heights, Folsom

Status: Toss Up

In 2008 and 2010, Democrats believed they had the candidate to beat Lungren but he held onto his seat. He won by seven points in 2010 against Ami Bera (D), a strong candidate in a strong Republican year. 2012 should be a neutral year at best for Republicans so if Bera runs again, he would have a strong chance to win. The district is more Democratic now because the district is entirely in Sacramento. It used to contain some Republican leaning rural counties but by losing those, the district becomes more Democratic.

California’s 4th Congressional District Tom McClintock (R)

Obama 152,125 45%, McCain 181,443 53%

Change: Obama +2

Demographics: 10% Hispanic, 82% White

Old Demographics: 9% Hispanic, 83% White

Communities of Interest: Roseville, Auburn, Nevada City

Status: Safe Republican

The district appears to undergo major changes by losing some northern rural counties but it actually keeps most of its residents. It becomes more of a Sacramento suburban district than a northern rural district though. It picks up rural parts of Yuba County and retains suburban Placer and El Dorado Counties while losing heavily Republican counties in northeast California. McClintock had a tough race here in 2008 and although the district becomes two points more Democratic, McClintock should be safe.

California’s 5th Congressional District Doris Matsui (D)

Obama 170,519 68%, McCain 75,712 30%

Change: McCain +4

Demographics: 13% African American, 16% Asian, 20% Hispanic, 45% White

Old Demographics: 14% African American, 15% Asian, 21% Hispanic, 43% White

Communities of Interest: Sacramento, Elk Grove

Status: Safe Democratic

Matsui’s district remains similar to its current configuration. It retains heavily minority and Democratic parts of Sacramento County. The only significant difference is that I extended her district up to the northern Sacramento County border to pick up some Republican areas to weaken the 3rd. Matsui’s district is completely safe for her and she is too popular for a successful primary challenge.

Photobucket

Bay Area

California’s 6th Congressional District Lynn Woolsey (D)

Obama 272,880 76%, McCain 81,299 23%

Change: McCain +1

Demographics: 15% Hispanic, 76% White

Old Demographics: 15% Hispanic, 76% White

Communities of Interest: Novato, San Rafael, Santa Rosa

Status: Safe Democratic

Besides losing the Mendocino County border and picking up the Sonoma Valley, the 6th district does not  change much. It remains very white and heavily Democratic.

California’s 7th Congressional district George Miller (D)

Obama 213,820 64%, McCain 112,657 34%

Change: McCain +15

Demographics: 11% Asian, 12% Hispanic, 70% White

Old Demographics: 17% African American, 13% Asian, 21% Hispanic, 43% White

Communities of Interest: Pinole, Martinez, Danville

Status: Safe Democratic

Miller’s district becomes less Democratic by losing all of its territory except for Pinole, Concord and Martinez (his home.) I had to move Richmond out of his district to boost the African American population of the 9th district. I doubt Miller will like running under these new lines that now include Lafayette, Walnut Creek and Danville. Even though this is the Democrats’ proposal, they will have to make the lines compact for the commission to even consider the proposal. Anyway, this district is too Democratic for a Republican to win because Obama won 64% here which is higher than his statewide average of 61%. Also, no other representative lives in this district so Miller should not face a primary challenge.

Photobucket

San Francisco/Oakland

California’s 8th Congressional District Nancy Pelosi (D)

Obama 283,378 85%, McCain 41,932 13%

Change: McCain +1

Demographics: 8% African American, 28% Asian, 15% Hispanic, 44% White

Old Demographics: 9% African American, 29% Asian, 16% Hispanic, 43% White

Communities of Interest: San Francisco

Status: Safe Democratic

Pelosi’s district picks up a few precincts in the Sunset District but besides that, her district does not change at all.

California’s 9th District Barbara Lee (D)

Obama 275,448 90%, McCain 23,750 8%

Change: Obama +4

Demographics: 28% African American, 16% Asian, 20% Hispanic, 32% White

Old Demographics: 26% African American, 15% Asian, 19% Hispanic, 35% White

Communities of Interest: Richmond, Berkeley, Oakland

Status: Safe Democratic

Lee’s district does change a bit as it loses a few Hispanic neighborhoods in South Oakland. Her district’s population growth was minimal so it needed to pick up people. It moved north into Contra Costa County to pick up Richmond with a large African American population. Although Lee should be reelected, she will want a high African American population. Her district will get 2 points more African American and it will be even more Democratic.

California’s 10th Congressional District John Garamendi (D)

Obama 170,310 62%, McCain 99,929 36%

Change: McCain +6

Demographics: 12% African American, 11% Asian, 20% Hispanic, 52% White

Old Demographics: 6% African American, 9% Asian, 15% Hispanic, 65% White

Communities of Interest: Vallejo, Fairfield, Pittsburg

Status: Safe Democratic

Garamendi’s district picks up Vallejo in Solano County. It loses Livermore which voted for Bush in 2004, and the 10th district loses the Walnut Creek area. To compensate for the loss of those areas, the 10th district picks up all of Solano County including heavily Democratic Vallejo. The 10th district picks up heavily Democratic Pittsburg too in Contra Costa County. The 10th district also picks up more Central Valley territory because the population growth in the Bay Area is slower than the rest of the state and I needed to push the districts further east to make sure the districts had equal populations. Picking up Lodi to protect McNerney in the 11th district who won by only one point in 2010 does make the 10th district a couple points more Republican. A 62% Obama percentage is high enough to keep Garamendi safe though. Also, Obama did well in the Walnut Creek area formerly in the 10th district but many of the voters there can swing to Republicans. The Democrats in Vallejo and Pittsburg which I moved into the 10th district usually stick with the Democratic ticket though.

California’s 11th District Jerry McNerney (D)

Obama 117,796 56% McCain 90,747 43%

Change: Obama +3

Demographics: 7% African American, 12% Asian, 30% Hispanic, 47% White

Old Demographics: 3% African American, 9% Asian, 20% Hispanic, 64% White

Communities of Interest: Tracy, Stockton, Modesto

Status: Lean Democratic

At a first glance, it appears that McNerney’s district becomes more Republican because it loses all of its territory in Democratic Contra Costa, Alameda and Santa Clara Counties. McNerney’s district becomes three points more Democratic though with the addition of Democratic parts of Stockton, the removal of Lodi and the addition of Democratic parts of Modesto. I did not want to county split here but for population purposes, I had to do so. McNerney should still face challenges but if he could survive in a more Republican district in a very Republican year, he should win in this new district.

California’s 12th District Jackie Speier (D)

Obama 216,757 74%, McCain 70,939 24%

Change: McCain +0

Demographics: 28% Asian, 19% Hispanic, 46% White

Old Demographics: 29% Asian, 16% Hispanic, 48% White

Communities of Interest: South San Francisco, Redwood City, Half Moon Bay

Status: Safe Democratic

Speier’s district shifts a bit south. She loses a few neighborhoods in SF but picks up some Hispanic neighborhoods in Redwood City. She also picks up Half Moon Bay and all of rural San Mateo County. These changes do not significantly alter her Democratic district.

California’s 13th District Pete Stark (D)

Obama 196,889 73%, McCain 68,594 25%

Change: McCain +2

Demographics: 9% African American, 22% Asian, 22% Hispanic, 42% White

Old Demographics: 6% African American, 28% Asian, 21% Hispanic, 38% White

Communities of Interest: San Leandro, Fremont, Pleasanton

Status: Safe Democratic

Stark’s district gets a few points more Republican with the addition of Dublin and Pleasanton. I did not want to connect Stark’s district with those areas but I had to add them for population purposes. Anyway, the district still stays heavily Democratic and safe for Stark.

Photobucket

San Jose

California’s 14th District Anna Eshoo (D)

Obama 224,972 70% McCain 89,228 28%

Change: McCain +6

Demographics: 15% Asian, 14% Hispanic, 63% White

Old Demographics: 16% Asian, 17% Hispanic, 59% White

Communities of Interest: Mountain View, Saratoga, San Jose

Status: Safe Democratic

Eshoo’s district becomes a few points more Republican by losing northern Santa Cruz County and picking up western San Jose. Yes, I understand that Tom Campbell (R) held a district in the 1990’s similar to this one. The 14th district has trended Democratic rapidly though in the last ten years and Obama won 70% of the vote here. Eshoo should have absolutely no worries, even if Campbell decided to run.

California’s 15th District Mike Honda (D)

Obama 172,003 70% McCain 69,337 28%

Change: Obama +4

Demographics: 39% Asian, 15% Hispanic, 40% White

Old Demographics: 29% Asian, 17% Hispanic, 47% White

Communities of Interest: Fremont, Cupertino, San Jose

Status: Safe Democratic

This district becomes more Asian by losing white neighborhoods in San Jose while picking up Asian neighborhoods in Fremont and Sunnyvale. It also picks up a few Asian neighborhoods south of Milpitas. These changes bring the Asian population to 39%. The commission has 5 Asians so I expect they will create some districts that will elect Asians such as this one. Honda is Asian but the Asian population in this district ensures that his successor will be too. Although the district is plurality white, these are 2000 population numbers and the district should have a 43%-44% Asian population now, making it plurality Asian.

California’s 16th Congressional District Zoe Lofgren (D)

Obama 152,658 70%, McCain 62,467 29%

Change: McCain +0

Demographics: 23% Asian, 40% Hispanic, 30% White

Old Demographics: 23% Asian, 38% Hispanic, 31% White

Communities of Interest: San Jose, Gilroy, Morgan Hill

Status: Safe Democratic

Lofgren’s district does not become less Democratic or Republican but an issue arises. Her district gets a few points more Hispanic and with her district’s growing Hispanic population, she may face a primary challenge from a Hispanic. Lofgren should win though because she is familiar with most of the 16th district’s voters and the Hispanic population is still not high enough to unseat her. If she retires in a few years, Hispanics will have a big chance to elect a representative here. Anyway, she gets new territory in Hispanic Gilroy and Morgan Hill. Her district keeps communities of interest though by staying within the county boundaries.

Photobucket

Central California

California’s 17th District Sam Farr (D)

Obama 194,877 71%, McCain 75,094 27%

Change: McCain +2

Demographics: 5% Asian, 35% Hispanic, 54% White

Old Demographics: 5% Asian, 43% Hispanic, 46% White

Communities of Interest: Santa Cruz, Monterey, Paso Robles

Status: Safe Democratic

Farr’s district becomes a few points more Republican but remains very safe. It is still a compact district containing all of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties while taking a small slice of San Luis Obispo County. The district loses all of agricultural San Benito County to the agricultural 18th district. The 17th picks up Republican leaning Paso Robles because it is in the Salinas Valley which is a community of interest in Monterey County. This also keeps Paso Robles out of the 23rd district.

California’s 18th District Dennis Cardoza (D)

Obama 101,440 55%, McCain 80,417 43%

Change: McCain +8

Demographics: 5% Asian, 45% Hispanic, 43% White

Old Demographics: 6% African American, 9% Asian, 42% Hispanic, 39% White

Communities of Interest: Hollister, Modesto, Merced

Status: Likely Democratic

Cardoza’s district becomes more Republican because the commission will want it to have compact lines. Thus, it will lose the finger into heavily Democratic Stockton. To compensate for the loss, the 18th district will go over the Diablo Range to pick up San Benito County which is mostly agricultural like the rest of the district and leans Democratic. The district splits Madera County with the 19th which  breaks county lines but western Madera is very similar to the rest of the district so it is a community of interest. As for Cardoza himself, his district is more Republican because he loses his stronghold of Stockton. The district is growing Democratic though, he won strongly in 2010, a very Republican year and the current Hispanic population should be close to 50% instead of 45%. He may face a tough challenge in a Republican year but he seems safe enough.

California’s 19th District Jeff Denham (R)

Obama 100,428 42%, McCain 136,148 56%

Change: McCain +8

Demographics: 28% Hispanic, 63% White

Old Demographics: 28% Hispanic, 59% White

Communities of Interest: Turlock, Mammoth Lakes, Barstow

Status: Safe Republican

The Sierras and the Mojave Desert used to be diced up between the Los Angeles centered 25th district and the formerly Central Valley centered 19th district so they were not united in one district. They are now part of the new 19th which is probably the most rural district in California now. The 19th loses all of Fresno and the parts of the Central Valley it has are mostly rural and white. Barstow may be far from the northern part of the district but these areas have similar residents. As for Denham, his district was already safe so he should be fine.

Photobucket

           Fresno Area

California’s 20th District Jim Costa (D)

Obama 89,084 59%, McCain 60,278 40%

Change: McCain +2

Demographics: 7% African American, 9% Asian, 55% Hispanic, 26% White

Old Demographics: 7% African American, 6% Asian, 63% Hispanic, 21% White

Communities of Interest: Fresno, Delano

Status: Likely Democratic

Costa faced a tough reelection bid and I would have strengthened his position but I wanted a district that the commission would approve due to compactness. His district gets a couple of points more Republican but he loses part of heavily Republican Kings County which has more in common with Tulare County which is partly in the 21st district. In his close 2010 reelection, he lost Kings County by more than 20 points. Costa gains more of his base in Fresno County. His district has a minority population of 74% as of 2000. It should be larger now. Nonetheless, since he won in 2010, he should be able to win in any year.

California’s 21st District Devin Nunes (R)

Obama 95,433 41%, McCain 132,702 57%

Change: McCain +2

Demographics: 5% Asian, 34% Hispanic, 54% White

Old Demographics: 5% Asian, 43% Hispanic, 46% White

Communities of Interest: Clovis, Visalia, Hanford

Status: Safe Republican

With the addition of half of Kings County, the 21st district becomes more Republican. While it loses some Republican parts of Tulare County, it also loses some Democratic parts of Fresno County. Although the district looks less compact than its original form, it still contains similar communities.

California’s 22nd District Kevin McCarthy (R)

Obama 81,294 40%, McCain 120,919 59%

Change: Obama +2

Demographics: 6% African American, 35% Hispanic, 53% White

Old Demographics: 6% African American, 21% Hispanic, 67% White

Communities of Interest: Shafter, Bakersfield, California City

Status: Safe Republican

The district loses portions of Los Angeles and San Luis Obispo Counties. It is now completely in Kern County and it picks up some Democratic neighborhoods in Bakersfield. This makes the 22nd more Democratic but it is still strongly Republican and more compact.

California’s 23rd District Lois Capps (D)

Obama 183,937 58%, McCain 127,332 40%

Change: McCain +16

Demographics: 27% Hispanic, 64% White

Old Demographics: 5% Asian, 41% Hispanic, 48% White

Communities of Interest: San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura

Status: Likely Democratic

Santa Barbara, a liberal university town with an economy based largely on tourism is not too similar to northern Santa Barbara County which is conservative and has an economy based on the Vanderburg Air Force Base and agriculture. Northern Santa Barbara County has tried to split from Santa Barbara County for those reasons. The 23rd district will unite them though because compactness is important. The 23rd also picks up all of San Luis Obispo County. The district loses heavily Democratic Oxnard which brings the McCain percentage up to 40%. In the 1990s, the district was competitive with similar lines but this area has trended Democratic since then so I expect Capps will retain her seat.

California’s 24th District Elton Gallegly (R)

Obama 158,267 55%, McCain 126,731 44%

Change: Obama +8

Demographics: 6% Asian, 34% Hispanic, 55% White

Old Demographics: 4% Asian, 22% Hispanic, 69% White

Communities of Interest: Oxnard, Moorpark, Simi Valley

Status: Tossup

This district loses the conservative parts of Santa Barbara County and picks up heavily Democratic Oxnard instead. This increases the Obama percentage in the district to 55%. Gallegly is an entrenched incumbent but he is not familiar with the voters in Oxnard. Gallegly could win by winning big margins in Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks. Gallegly keeps hinting he wants to retire so these new lines may convince him to do so. If he leaves, the seats will be hotly contested but I expect the Democrat to win by a few points.

Photobucket

West LA

California’s 25th District Buck McKeon (R)

Obama 139,488 50% McCain 132,660 48%

Change: McCain +0

Demographics: 9% African American, 5% Asian, 27% Hispanic, 55% White

Old Demographics: 8% African American, 4% Asian, 27% Hispanic, 57% White

Communities of Interest: Santa Clarita, Palmdale, Victorville

Status: Likely Republican

This district shrinks as it loses rural areas in the desert and eastern Sierras. It still resembles a tossup because Obama barely won it but this district is strongly Republican. Kerry won only 40% here and McKeon is highly popular. When he retires, a strong Democrat against a weak Republican can win here but although this area is trending Democratic, it is still Republican at a local level.

California’s 26th District Darrell Issa (R) Grey

Obama 143,487 49%, McCain 142,232 49%

Change: Obama +8 (the old 49th District.)

Demographics: 5% Asian, 26% Hispanic, 62% White

Old Demographics: 5% African American, 4% Asian, 30% Hispanic, 57% White

Communities of Interest: San Clemente, Oceanside, Carlsbad

Status: Lean Republican

Although Issa represents the 49th district currently, this district has most of the old 49th district including his home so I expect him to run here. The district has become more Democratic with the removal of conservative inland areas and the addition of some coastal towns such as Carlsbad which lean Democratic. He does pick up conservative San Clemente in Orange County though. Even though Obama won this district, Issa should have an advantage because he contains most of his old territory. A Democratic candidate such as Nick Leibham could run a strong race here though.

Photobucket

LA Area Zoom out

California’s 27th District Adam Schiff (D) (formerly represented the 29th)

Obama 185,229 68%, McCain 79,728 29%

Change: Obama +1

Demographics: 6% African American, 14% Asian, 32% Hispanic, 43% White

Old Demographics: 6% African American, 24% Asian, 26% Hispanic, 39% White

Communities of Interest: Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena

Status: Safe Democratic

Schiff’s district picks up some Hispanics in a few LA neighborhoods and loses a few Asian areas in the eastern part of the district to the 32nd. The district does not undergo major changes overall. Schiff should have no difficulties retaining his seat.

California’s 28th District Vacant

Obama 123,900 72%, McCain 43,547 25%

Change: McCain +8

Demographics: 5% African American, 7% Asian, 64% Hispanic, 21% White

Old Demographics: 4% African American, 6% Asian, 56% Hispanic, 31% White

Communities of Interest: San Fernando, Los Angeles

Status: Safe Democratic

No matter what the Democrats or Republicans propose, the commission will probably create a strong Hispanic majority district in the San Fernando Valley due to its high Hispanic population and the lack of a Hispanic representative. This district formerly belonged to Howard Berman (D) but he will probably run in the new 30th District or retire. Regardless, a 64% Hispanic population should be enough for a Hispanic to win. A possible candidate would be rising star Alex Padilla (D).

California’s 29th District Henry Waxman (D) (formerly represented the 30th)

Obama 271,019 76%, McCain 78,109 22%

Change: Obama +12

Demographics: 10% Asian, 13% Hispanic, 69% White

Old Demographics: 9% Asian, 8% Hispanic, 76% White

Communities of Interest: Malibu, Beverly Hills, Los Angeles

Status: Safe Democratic

This district was formerly the 30th District. It looks different though because it loses neighborhoods in the San Fernando Valley and towns such as Agoura Hills and Calabasas. The district picks up some of Venice Beach to compensate for the population loss. This helps make the district more Democratic even though this district full of Hollywood liberals was safe for Waxman already.

California’s 30th District Howard Berman (D) vs. Brad Sherman (D) (formerly the 27th)

Obama 193,870 65%, McCain 99,181 33%

Change: McCain +2

Demographics: 10% Asian, 21% Hispanic, 61% White

Old Demographics: 5% African American, 11% Asian, 37% Hispanic, 44% White

Communities of Interest: Agoura Hills, Chatsworth, Northridge

Status: Safe Democratic

This district changes as it picks up the Agoura Hills and Northridge areas. Although this district is too Democratic for a Republican, there might be a big primary fight here. I am not sure if the Democratic party will like combining the two incumbents but the commission will do it in order to create a Hispanic majority district in the San Fernando Valley. This district combines most of the white parts of the San Fernando Valley. Although this district contains more of Sherman’s territory, Berman is more entrenched and he has the backing of Waxman. His backing may translate into votes in the parts of Waxman’s old district such as Agoura Hills and Calabasas if Waxman campaigns strongly for Berman. Anyway, this will be an interesting race or Sherman may decide not to run here but run in the nearby 24th instead if Gallegly retires.

California’s 31st District Xavier Beccara (D)

Obama 111,611 81%, McCain 22,567 16%

Change: Obama +2

Demographics: 7% African American, 17% Asian, 64% Hispanic, 9% White

Old Demographics: 4% African American, 14% Asian, 70% Hispanic, 10% White

Communities of Interest: Downtown Los Angeles, Clement Junction, Silver Lake

Status: Safe Democratic

Beccara’s district becomes more compact as it picks up areas such as Boyle Heights from the 34th District. It loses a few Hispanics but still remains heavily Hispanic and Democratic.

Photobucket

Los Angeles Zoom in

California’s 32nd District Judy Chu (D)

Obama 134,143 59% McCain 86,631 38%

Change: McCain +17

Demographics: 31% Asian, 38% Hispanic, 25% White

Old Demographics: 18% Asian, 62% Hispanic, 15% White

Communities of Interest: Monterey Park, El Monte, Glendora

Status: Safe Democratic

The commission will probably create a district where an Asian candidate can win in this part of LA County. The district could be extended into Asian neighborhoods in Diamond Bar but I doubt they will do that because it will create convoluted lines if they want to connect Asian areas in Monterey Park and Diamond Bar. The 32nd district loses Hispanic Baldwin Park but picks up Asian areas near Arcadia. Although Asians are not the plurality in the district, they have higher voter turnout rates than Hispanics so Chu should survive a primary challenge from a Hispanic candidate. Chu’s current district is 62% Hispanic and 18% Asian so the possibility of a strong Hispanic candidate challenging her in the primary looms. The district becomes more Republican because the new Asian areas such as San Marino and Arcadia are not heavily Democratic. Obama’s 21 point win here should be high enough to protect Chu and she should perform higher than Obama among Asians too.

California’s 33rd District Karen Bass (D) Purple

Obama 208,574 90% McCain 20,884 9%

Change: Obama +6

Demographics: 39% African American, 6% Asian, 44% Hispanic, 9% White

Old Demographics: 30% African American, 12% Asian, 35% Hispanic, 20% White

Communities of Interest: Los Angeles, Culver City, Inglewood

Status: Safe Democratic

With the inclusion of Inglewood, this becomes the most Democratic district in California. The district becomes more Democatic. On this new map, it is the most Democratic district in California. Also, I had to eliminate one African American district in LA because it will be difficult for all three African Americans to hold their districts as the Hispanic population grows. Bass’s district’s African American population rises from 30% to 39%. While Hispanics are still a plurality here, African Americans make up the majority of Democratic primary voters so Bass should be safe.

California’s 34th District Lucille Roybal Allard (D) Green

Obama 129,907 73%, McCain 44,871 25%

Change: McCain +4

Demographics: 5% Asian, 78% Hispanic, 12% White

Old Demographics: 6% Asian, 77% Hispanic, 11% White

Communities of Interest: East Los Angeles, Downey, Norwalk

Status: Safe Democratic

Yes, I understand this district may be too narrow and too long so the commission may not think it is compact. A district like this is necessary though because if it were more compact around the East Los Angeles area, the Hispanic population would be considered too high and it would be considered packing under the VRA. Many of the Hispanic areas there are around 90% Hispanic. Other Hispanic majority districts would not have enough Hispanics to elect a Hispanic representative if they cannot pick up heavily Hispanic neighborhoods such as East Los Angeles, Pico Rivera and Lynwood. Anyway, Allard’s district is still 78% Hispanic even while picking up less Hispanic Whittier and Norwalk which makes the district a few points more Republican but still safe for Allard.

California’s 35th District Maxine Waters (D)

Obama 174,206 84%, McCain 29,312 14%

Change: McCain +0

Demographics: 35% African American, 10% Asian, 46% Hispanic, 7% White

Old Demographics: 34% African American, 6% Asian, 47% Hispanic, 10% White

Communities of Interest: Gardena, Compton, Carson

Status: Safe Democratic

The 35th District is now a combination of the current 35th and 37th districts but much of the 37th District is in the new 46th District so Waters has a bit more territory here. Although her district loses her base of Inglewood and picks up Compton and Carson from the 37th District, Waters should win.

California’s 36th District Vacant

Obama 183,287 60%, McCain 115,882 38%

Change: McCain +8

Demographics: 14% Asian, 29% Hispanic, 49% White

Old Demographics: 13% Asian, 30% Hispanic, 48% White

Communities of Interest: Manhattan Beach, Torrance, Rancho Palos Verdes

Status: Safe Democratic

The district becomes more Republican as it loses most of Venice Beach and picks up Republican leaning Rancho Palos Verdes. This district had similar territory in the 1990s and was very competitive. The territory has trended Democratic very quickly with Kerry performing better than Gore here while Gore performed better than Kerry statewide. Obama’s 60% of the vote here is very close to his statewide average of 61%. The current congresswoman Jane Harman (D) will resign soon. The Democrats though have strong candidates running to including former city councilwoman Janice Hahn (D) and popular Secretary of State Debra Bowen (D). They should keep this district in the Democratic column.

California’s 37th District David Dreier (R) (formerly the 26th District)

Obama 128,094 56%, McCain 95,077 42%

Change: Obama +10

Demographics: 7% African American, 9% Asian, 44% Hispanic, 37% White

Old Demographics: 4% African American, 15% Asian, 24% Hispanic, 52% White

Communities of Interest: Covina, Pomona, Chino Hills

Status: Likely Democratic

The 37th straddles the border between Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties. As for the party strength in this district, Obama may have won with 56% of the vote here but if the Republican candidate is extremely popular and can make inroads with Hispanics, he or she could win. David Dreier (R)’s district was eliminated on this map. He could run here because it contains part of his old district with Upland but he is not familiar with the mostly Democratic Covina or Pomona voters so a Democrat could win here with large margins from those two cities. As for Hispanic representation, the district is probably close to 50% Hispanic now. They would not make up the majority of the votes but there may be enough Hispanics to elect a Hispanic in the Democratic primary because many of the white voters in this district are Republican.

California’s 38th District Grace Napolitano (D)

Obama 142,359 67%, McCain 67,249 31%

Change: McCain +8

Demographics: 21% Asian, 60% Hispanic, 14% White

Old Demographics: 10% Asian, 71% Hispanic, 14% White

Communities of Interest: Pico Rivera, Baldwin Park, Diamond Bar

Status: Safe Democratic

This district becomes more Republican by losing Norwalk and picking up Diamond Bar. Napolitano lives in Norwalk but she should run here since it contains most of her old district. Also, the district loses Hispanics but the 60% Hispanic population should protect Napolitano.

California’s 39th District Linda Sanchez (D)

Obama 126,006 72%, McCain 46,251 26%

Change: Obama +12

Demographics: 9% African American, 9% Asian, 67% Hispanic, 14% White

Old Demographics: 6% African American, 10% Asian, 61% Hispanic, 21% White

Communities of Interest: Huntington Park., Lynwood, Lakewood

Status: Safe Democratic

The district becomes more Democratic and Hispanic with the loss of swing areas such as La Mirada and the addition of heavily Hispanic Huntington Park. Sanchez should have no problems here.

Photobucket

Orange/Riverside Counties

California’s 40th District Ed Royce (R)

Obama 125,615 48%, McCain 131,448 50%

Change: Obama +2

Demographics: 14% Asian, 32% Hispanic, 48% White

Old Demographics: 16% Asian, 30% Hispanic, 49% White

Communities of Interest: La Mirada, Fullerton, Orange

Status: Likely Republican

Royce’s district keeps most of its old territory but expands a bit. It picks up the swing area La Mirada in Los Angeles County as well as Whittier. It loses marginal Los Alamitos. These changes make the district a bit more Democratic. Royce is popular here though so he should win. If Royce retires at the end of the decade though, a Democrat could make this competitive.

Photobucket

San Bernardino Area

California’s 41st District Jerry Lewis (R)

Obama 114,430 43%, McCain 145,829 55%

Change: McCain +2

Demographics: 5% African American, 23% Hispanic, 65% White

Old Demographics: 5% African American, 23% Hispanic, 64% White

Communities of Interest: Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, Banning

Status: Safe Republican

The district grew so it will shed some territory. It lost most of rural San Bernardino County including Barstow and Needles. It also loses Republican leaning Hemet and San Jacinto. It does pick up Republican leaning Rancho Cucamonga though. Rancho Cucamonga is not next to the bulk of the district’s population which is east of San Bernardino and Riverside. Rancho Cucamonga can be considered a community of interest though because it has similar demographics and voting habits with the rest of the district. Also, connecting Rancho Cucamonga to the rest of the district does not create convoluted lines.

California’s 42nd District Gary Miller (R)

Obama 147,589 46%, McCain 170,780 53%

Change: Obama +1

Demographics: 15% Asian, 14% Hispanic, 66% White

Old Demographics: 16% Asian, 24% Hispanic, 54% White

Communities of Interest: Yorba Linda, Irvine, Lake Forest

Status: Safe Republican

Gary Miller’s home is now in the heavily Hispanic 38th district but I believe he will run here since this district contains much of his old territory. The district is now completely in Orange County and it picks up Democratic leaning Irvine. These changes do not change the political composition of the district much though. Miller should be safe.

California’s 43rd District Joe Baca (D)

Obama 106,880 64%, McCain 55,738 34%

Change: McCain +8

Demographics: 14% African American, 5% Asian, 50% Hispanic, 28% White

Old Demographics: 12% African American, 3% Asian, 58% Hispanic, 23% White

Communities of Interest: Fontana, Colton, San Bernardino

Status: Safe Democratic

The district becomes more Republican and less Hispanic by losing Democratic Ontario and picking up Republican leaning Highland. The district is 72% minority and the minority percentage should be higher now. The Hispanic population of the old district was 58% in 2000 but grew to 66% in 2010 so the Hispanic population of this district should currently be in the high 50’s. That should be enough to protect Baca.

California’s 44th District Vacant (R)

Obama 95,838 62% McCain 54,979 36%

Change: N/A

Demographics: 11% African American, 5% Asian, 48% Hispanic, 33% White

Old Demographics: N/A

Communities of Interest: Ontario, Riverside, Moreno Valley

Status: Likely Democratic

This is the new minority majority district in the Inland Empire which contains Hispanic neighborhoods in Ontario as well as Riverside and Moreno Valley. The district was not Hispanic majority in 2000 but should be in the low 50s now. Although Hispanics may not make up the majority of the voters, they should make up the majority of the Democratic primary voters because many of the whites in the 44th District vote Republican. Also, this district is too Democratic to elect a Republican so the Democrat who wins here should be safe.

California’s 45th District Ken Calvert (R) (formerly the 44th)

Obama 104,697 49% McCain 103,291 49%

Change: McCain +1

Demographics: 6% African American, 5% Asian, 33% Hispanic, 52% White

Old Demographics: 6% African American, 5% Asian, 35% Hispanic, 51% White

Communities of Interest: Corona, Riverside, San Jacinto

Status: Lean Republican

This district at first looks like a pure tossup when considering the vote totals but it leans Republican because Obama over performed in the Inland Empire. Democrats have a shot here though because Ken Calvert (R) is a weak incumbent and won in 2008 only because of margins in Orange County. His district loses Orange County while picking up Democratic Perris and marginal San Jacinto. Although the district gets a point more Republican, it is quickly trending Democratic. Also, Bill Hedrick (D) in 2008 received almost no support from national Democrats but lost by only 2 points against Calvert. If Hedrick runs in a good Democratic year and receives support from national Democrats, he should win.

California’s 46th District Dana Rohrabacher (R)

Obama 149,749 58% McCain 103,370 40%

Change: Obama +20

Demographics: 8% African American, 16% Asian, 30% Hispanic, 42% White

Old Demographics: 1% African American, 15% Asian, 17% Hispanic, 62% White

Communities of Interest: Long Beach, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach

Status: Lean Democratic

The district becomes more Democratic with the addition of Democratic areas in Long Beach. The removal of Costa Mesa and most of Huntington Beach helps too. Rohrabacher is popular but even he should not win in a 58% Obama district. Also, the new Democratic voters from Long Beach are not familiar with him so he will not be able to win by getting Democrats in Long Beach to ticket split. An issue with this district is that western Long Beach may not be considered a community of interest with the rest of the district. It should work because it is in the same city limits as eastern Long Beach which is currently in the 46th District and should be a community of interest with the Orange County part of the district. Also, the addition of most of Long Beach makes the district compact and it formerly had a thin line going to Rancho Palos Verdes.

California’s 47th District Loretta Sanchez (D)

Obama 85,661 59%, McCain 57,061 39%

Change: McCain +1

Demographics: 15% Asian, 62% Hispanic, 19% White

Old Demographics: 14% Asian, 65% Hispanic, 17% White

Communities of Interest: Anaheim, Santa Ana, Garden Grove

Status: Safe Democratic

Sanchez’s district does not change much because it is already a Hispanic majority district and it contains similar communities. She picks up more of Garden Grove which may not be the best idea because her 2010 challenger Van Tran (R) is popular there. She should be safe because she won by double digits in 2010, an extremely Republican year and if she were strong then, she is strong now.

California’s 48th District John Campbell (R)

Obama 150,612 46%, McCain 167,583 52%

Change: McCain +8

Demographics: 8% Asian, 16% Hispanic, 71% White

Old Demographics: 13% Asian, 15% Hispanic, 68% White

Communities of Interest: Huntington Beach, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach

Status: Safe Republican

Campbell’s district loses Irvine and becomes the coastal district. It picks up Huntington Beach and Costa Mesa. Although the district is narrow, it certainly picks up communities of interest by getting all the beach towns. The district becomes more Republican with the loss of Irvine but Campbell was pretty safe anyway. This district may be open to voting for a libertarian Democrat if they view Campbell as one of the big government Republicans but for now, this district remains Republican.

California’s 49th District Mary Bono (R) (formerly the 45th District)

Obama 116,668 44%, McCain 145,303 55%

Change: McCain +16

Demographics: 23% Hispanic, 68% White

Old Demographics: 6% African American, 38% Hispanic, 50% White

Communities of Interest: Lake Elsinore, Temecula, Palm Springs

Status: Safe Republican

Bono’s old district contained Moreno Valley and voted for Obama by 5 points. Her district is now more Republican with the removal of Moreno Valley and heavily Hispanic Coachella. Her district picks up Republican Murrieta and Temecula though. Although Palm Springs leans Democratic, Murrieta and Temecula more than cancel out the Democratic votes there.

Photobucket

San Diego Area

California’s 50th District Brian Bilbray (R)

Obama 201,068 59%, McCain 133,105 39%

Change: Obama +16

Demographics: 15% Asian, 11% Hispanic, 67% White

Old Demographics: 10% Asian, 19% Hispanic, 66% White

Communities of Interest: Del Mar, San Diego

Status: Lean Democratic

Bilbray has represented San Diego for a number of years and he is used to running in districts that lean Democratic. His old 50th District voted for Obama by a couple of points. He should lose in this district though because he picks up more of San Diego City including some white liberal areas from the 53rd. This increases the Obama percentage to 59% and that should be enough to beat him. This district also fits the guidelines for the commission by remaining compact and taking in similar neighborhoods. It is possible Susan Davis (D) from the 53rd will run here because her district’s white population may be too small for her and the 50th district contains part of her old district. She ran against Bilbray in 2000 and it will be an interesting rematch. She should win though.

California’s 51st District Bob Filner (D)

Obama 119,277 58%, McCain 82,165 40%

Change: McCain +9

Demographics: 6% Asian, 61% Hispanic, 26% White

Old Demographics: 9% African American, 12% Asian, 53% Hispanic, 21% White

Communities of Interest: Coachella, El Centro, Chula Vista

Status: Safe Democratic

Bob Filner is a popular representative but the commission will create a Hispanic majority district with parts of San Diego.  He has handily beaten back primary challenges from Hispanics though in a 53% Hispanic district. He won with support from African Americans and Asians and he loses many of those voters to the 53rd district. He retains most of his old territory so he may survive. Nonetheless, his district becomes more Hispanic by picking up Coachella and Indio. I have also heard of proposals to connect Imperial County to an eastern San Diego County district. Those areas do not have much in common though and Hispanics need a district in the San Diego area. The district becomes more Republican too though by losing National City and some Democratic neighborhoods in San Diego but remains safe for Filner.

California’s 52nd District Duncan Hunter Jr. (R)

Obama 128,894 44%, McCain 160,825 55%

Change: McCain +3

Demographics: 5% Asian, 18% Hispanic, 69% White

Old Demographics: 5% Asian, 14% Hispanic, 73% White

Communities of Interest: Poway, San Diego, El Cajon

Status: Safe Republican

The district was already Republican but it becomes even more Republican. It loses most of San Diego City except the northeastern area and picks up Republican leaning Escondido. Hunter should have no problems here.

California’s 53rd District Susan Davis (D)

Obama 116,327 70%, McCain 46,533 28%

Change: Obama +4

Demographics: 14% African American, 14% Asian, 42% Hispanic, 26% White

Old Demographics: 7% African American, 8% Asian, 29% Hispanic, 51% White

Communities of Interest: National City, San Diego

Status: Safe Democratic

Davis’s district gets less white as it loses more northern parts of San Diego and picks up National City. These changes make the district more Democratic but less safe for Davis. She faces the possibility of a primary challenge from a minority candidate. She should survive because many of the voters in the new 53rd are from her old district and whites probably outnumber Hispanics in the Democratic primary. Also, Davis should get support from African Americans and Asians. Filner may give her a primary challenge here though.

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

California with 37 VRA seats

Here we go again! Another California map…

I dunno how much demand is actually left for California redistricting maps, but here’s my latest version anyhow. Since this’ll be the last map I post (of California or any other state) until actual Census data is available, I’ve decided to go all out.

When I posted my original California map that basically disregarded the VRA, and again when I posted my VRA maps of Southern states, I was strongly encouraged to create a new California map that takes the VRA as its starting point. While initially somewhat resistant, I was persuaded that I should do exactly that mainly when I looked over the new California redistricting guidelines and saw that they prioritize the VRA above all other criteria.

Moreover, whereas my initial map used the 2008 population estimates, I wanted to make a map using the more accurate American Community Survey projections. So, I’ve created the following maps and analysis by this methodology:

1) I first addressed Section 5 preclearance concerns to ensure that none of the four covered counties (Kings, Merced, Monterrey, Yuba) would be subject to a “retrogression” challenge.

2) I then addressed Section 2 requirements that majority-minority districts be drawn wherever compact minority communities permit the drawing of such districts without substantially ignoring traditional redistricting criteria.

3) I then filled in the rest of the map based on the non-partisan criteria specified by the California guidelines (contiguity, geographic integrity, communities of interest, compactness). As such, I altogether disregarded partisan data and incumbent residency as required by law (especially easy to do on the ACS version at Dave’s app which doesn’t feature partisan data).

4) However, I wanted to know what the partisan effects would be, so I then had to translate my ACS-VRA map into partisan figures – which was easily the most time-consuming part of this exercise.

5) Finally, I was curious to see how the maps I drew would match up with the current incumbents, so I pinpointed where each one lives and identified in which district on my map they would end up.

The resulting maps below feature 37 majority-minority seats of which 15 are majority-Latino and 1 is majority-Asian.

So, I’m finally ready to present all that after the jump. Needless to mention, analyzing California is a daunting task, so I’ve decided to organize my presentation as follows:

For the purposes of my discussion, I’ve divided the state into the following regions: (1) Northern California (including Sacramento); (2) the Bay Area; (3) the Central Valley & Central Coast; (4) Los Angeles; (5) Orange County & the Inland Empire; (6) the San Diego Area.

For each region, I’ve posted some general comments, then listed the 2008 Obama/McCain figures for each district including the incumbent of that currently numbered district, and then posted the relevant maps. I then have three sections of commentary: VRA Implications, Partisan Impact, and Incumbents.

A quick note on the latter: It goes without saying that where the incumbents end up in the new maps is highly speculative. The reason why I decided to look at this anyhow is twofold: (1) at the very least, it gives some sense of how the new maps are likely to scramble the incumbents, even if the actual final arrangement is very different; (2) the places where incumbents are likely to end up together in the same district or where districts are likely to initially end up without a resident incumbent obviously correlate with the most highly gerrymandered parts of the state, and so therefore it’s safe to say that the incumbents that are most affected on my map will be the ones at highest risk under the actual maps. Of course, residency within a district is not a requirement to run for Congress, but Congress critters do generally prefer to run where they live – or to move if they have to.

One last note before I get underway: I’ve played with the California maps enough at this point that I have a rather good sense of what decisions are likely to help Democrats or Republicans. All else being equal, I have generally made those decisions which are most helpful to the GOP. On one hand, I’ve done this to minimize unfounded accusations of partisan mapping bias on my part. On the other hand, I’ve done this because I think similar decisions will maximize the likelihood of a map being approved by the Redistricting Commission which requires three GOP votes to pass the maps. On the third hand (?!), I’ve done this because I would rather see a ‘worst-case scenario’ for Democrats, with the awareness that the actual maps are likely to be somewhat more favorable, than to promote a rose-colored glasses view inconsistent with the probable outcome. In short, if you are a Republican and you don’t like my maps, you probably need to reflect on how consistent your perception of California is with reality.

So, without further ado, here goes!

Northern California & Sacramento

Below I’ve started with two maps. The first is a broader view of NorCal while the second is a closer view of Sacramento so that it’s clear where I’ve drawn the lines and how the Sacramento districts intersect with the surrounding districts.

In my view, the NorCal mapping scheme is very likely to resemble this arrangement. (I guess that’s stating the obvious..) On one hand, there’s a certain symmetry: two districts anchored by Sacramento, two compact districts extending toward the northwest and the northeast respectively, and one district covering the sparsely populated northern end of the state.

I’ve seen several maps that further subdivide Sacramento County or that create more elongated districts stretching as far as the Oregon border. I personally don’t think the such maps are consistent with the current rules that call for minimizing county/city subdivisions and that generally prohibit bypassing centers of population to reach more distant populations.

In any case, here are the partisan figures for these five districts. I’ll post further comments after the maps.

CA-01 (D-Thompson): 61% Obama – 37% McCain

CA-02 (R-Herger): 47% Obama – 51% McCain

CA-03 (R-Lungren): 50% Obama – 48% McCain

CA-04 (R-McClintock): 44% Obama – 54% McCain

CA-05 (D-Matsui): 68% Obama – 30% McCain (61% Minority – 18% Asian; 25% Latino)



VRA Implications: There’s not much in the way of VRA implications with concern to mapping Northern California. Yuba County is a Section 5 preclearance county but it’s currently in a 76% white district. On my map, it goes from its present location in CA-02 represented by Herger to the CA-04 district represented by McClintock. The new CA-04 district has virtually identical racial/partisan stats as the current CA-02, so there’s no “retrogression” concern. The only other district of VRA interest is CA-05 and my map takes it from 56% minority to 61% minority. There’s no prospect of creating any other majority-minority districts, nor is there a prospect of creating a district with a majority from a single minority group.

Partisan Impact: Herger’s CA-02 district goes from 55% McCain to 51% McCain and Lungren’s CA-03 goes from an even 49%-49% split to 50% Obama/48% McCain. In the case of CA-02, the district should be safe enough for Herger, but he’d probably have to actually put a bit of effort into his reelection campaigns and there might be an opening for the right Democrat in a good year for Dems, particularly if the seat comes open.

Lungren’s CA-03 might be far more problematic from his standpoint. On paper, it’s a ‘tossup’ at worse, but Lungren’s been facing stiff challenges in recent elections, and he doesn’t strike me as a particularly good fit for this district that’s now fully contained in Sacramento County. While the district should be quite suitable for a Sacramento Republican, I’m not too sure that Lungren is that Republican, and the area is gradually trending leftward (which will be a problem for the GOP no matter how the ‘second’ Sacramento district gets drawn).

The other three districts are not meaningfully affected, though Thompson’s CA-01 does drop from 66% Obama to 61% Obama.

Incumbents: My map doesn’t displace any of the current incumbents in these five districts and it’s unlikely that any mapping scheme would. That includes Tom McClintock: A lot of sources still list his residence as Elk Grove in Sacramento County, but he’s officially moved to Roseville in Placer County.

The Bay Area

My latest map of the Bay Area is below.

The most consequential effect of using the ACS figures has been that CA-11 is clearly pushed out of the Bay Area and into the Central Valley (which is where I’ll deal with it below). Otherwise, my main concerns here were maximizing the number of majority-minority seats and carving out a majority-Asian seat in particular.

In my experimentation with mapping the Bay Area, it seems fairly clear to me that there are only two districts with significant ambiguity as to how the lines will end up: On my map below, they’re CA-10 and CA-16. What does seem clear enough, however, is that most of the districts will be arranged along the Bay coast, with a ‘hinterland’ district centered in Contra Costa/Alameda, and then leaving what I think of as a ‘mop-up’ district piecing together the ‘leftovers’ from the districts with more obvious placement (e.g., CA-10 on this map).

It’s also worth noting that the contours of this mapping scheme were partially determined by what has to happen in the Central Valley to maintain a VRA-compliant CA-18 district. To do that, you have to split off the heavily Latino parts of Stanislaus and San Joaquin counties, which means you have to situate a district on the remainder which still leaves a part left over on one end or the other. The most coherent mapping scheme I could identify involved attaching that leftover part to CA-10 rather than, say, CA-19. Either way, it doesn’t make much difference: CA-10 will still be heavily Dem and CA-19 will still be heavily GOP.

CA-06 (D-Woolsey): 76% Obama – 22% McCain

CA-07 (D-Miller): 73% Obama – 25% McCain (52% Minority – 15% Asian; 24% Latino)

CA-08 (D-Pelosi): 85% Obama – 13% McCain (52% Minority – 29% Asian)

CA-09 (D-Lee): 88% Obama – 10% McCain (64% Minority – 20% AA; 20% Asian; 21% Latino)

CA-10 (D-Garamendi): 61% Obama – 38% McCain (55% Minority – 24% Latino)

CA-12 (D-Speier): 74% Obama – 25% McCain(57% Minority – 32% Asian; 19% Latino)

CA-13 (D-Stark): 70% Obama – 28% McCain (74% Minority – 51% Asian)

CA-14 (D-Eshoo): 71% Obama – 27% McCain

CA-15 (D-Honda): 71% Obama – 27% McCain (71% Minority – 26% Asian; 39% Latino)

CA-16 (D-Lofgren): 65% Obama – 34% McCain (52% Minority – 17% Asian; 25% Latino)

VRA Implications: My map takes the Bay Area from seven majority-minority districts out of 11 to eight majority-minority districts out of 10. The CA-13 district is also majority-Asian. In some cases, I’ve swapped proportions (i.e., CA-08 goes from 58% to 52% minority while CA-12 goes from 52% to 57% minority; CA-16 goes from 69% to 52% minority while CA-15 goes from 53% to 71% minority). This is augmented by the fact that CA-11 goes from the current 63% white district to a 52% minority district in the Central Valley and CA-17 on the Central Coast becomes a majority-minority district.

For the record, you evidently cannot create a majority-Latino district in San Jose even if you ‘give up’ the majority-Asian district. The Latino population is too intermixed with the Asian population in much of the area.

Partisan Impact: The Bay Area seats will all be heavily Democratic seats no matter how they’re mapped out.

It’s been suggested elsewhere that ‘a foothills seat in Contra Costa / Alameda’ could be a tossup seat. This is obviously not true – mainly because you don’t have anywhere near enough people there as should be self-evident in these maps. The most Republican seat that I was able to create following that guideline was a 59% Obama seat. Once you take in all the most Republican areas in the eastern part of the Bay counties, you must necessarily go into heavily Democratic areas in order to fill out the necessary population.

There’s also been a suggestion that: “The outer areas of current CD14-CD15-CD16 could end up being a tossup seat.” That makes no sense whatsoever. The “outer areas” of those districts are basically Santa Cruz County, which was a 77% Obama county. To make the long story short, anyone who sees a “tossup” district in the Bay Area (much less a Republican district) is hallucinating.

Incumbents: My mapping scheme would inconvenience several Bay Area incumbents, with at least one of them being out of a job (unless he or she moves to the Central Valley). McNerney lives in Pleasanton (central Alameda County) which ends up in CA-16 on this map. Since this district is most similar to his current district, I think he’d be very likely to run there. Mike Honda lives in the Campbell area of San Jose, which ends up in CA-14 on this map. This is essentially Anna Eshoo’s district who lives in Atherton which is still in CA-14. Meanwhile, Zoe Lofgren lives in San Jose and would end up in CA-15.

As I see it, the most obvious place for Mike Honda to run would actually be CA-13 since it becomes majority-Asian and takes in substantial parts of his current district, but if Pete Stark doesn’t retire that’d mean a primary battle – aside from the residency issue. Ultimately, I don’t know how this would be sorted out. Perhaps some Californians could comment on it.

Whatever the case, tidying up the lines in the San Jose area makes it highly probable that at least two Democrats will end up in the same district – even leaving aside the fact that the Bay Area will lose a seat.

It’s also worth noting that Garamendi lives in Walnut Grove (Sacramento County) which just barely ends up in this CA-10 district. That said, I think Garamendi will end up running in whatever district most resembles his current district regardless, whether or not he has to move.

Central Coast & Central Valley

The Central Coast and the Central Valley are really two separate regions, but I’ve decided to cover them together for the sake of expedience. By and large, the mapping scheme that I settled on was dictated by Section 5 preclearance concerns, since three of these counties are covered: Kings, Merced, and Monterey. In short, I mapped the relevant districts first (CA-20, CA-18, and CA-17) to satisfy ‘retrogression’ concerns, and then mapped the rest accordingly.

A couple of general points are worth noting. San Benito County only has about 55,000 people and doesn’t really make a significant difference regardless how it’s mapped. I basically chose to add just enough of it to CA-17 so that the boundaries with CA-12 to the north and CA-23 to the south could be the coastal county lines. The remainder then obviously belonged with CA-20 (but again, it makes no meaningful difference to either the partisan or ethnic breakdown).

As for the Great Basin, it’s even more sparsely populated and even less consequential than San Benito. I’m sure there’s some Republican out there who imagines that if the Great Basin were instead divided and appended to the more central districts it’d somehow benefit the GOP. Any such Republicans are misguided. About 30,000 people live in the Great Basin and chopping it up does little besides create a less coherent map. But, hey, if it makes the Commission feel better for some reason, I say go for it.

Besides reiterating that CA-11 isn’t really ‘McNerney’s district’ on this map – having been displaced from the Bay Area to the Central Valley due to population shifts – I’ll save the rest of my commentary for below.

Here’s the Obama/McCain breakdown for these districts:

Central Coast

CA-17 (D-Farr): 73% Obama – 25% McCain (54% Minority – 44% Latino)

CA-23 (D-Capps): 57% Obama – 41% McCain

CA-24 (R-Gallegly): 56% Obama – 43% McCain (52% Minority – 41% Latino)

Central Valley

CA-11 (D-McNerney): 51% Obama – 47% McCain (52% Minority – 33% Latino)

CA-18 (D-Cardoza): 57% Obama – 41% McCain (69% Minority – 54% Latino)

CA-19 (R-Denham): 41% Obama – 56% McCain

CA-20 (D-Costa): 50% Obama – 48% McCain (75% Minority – 66% Latino)

CA-21 (R-Nunes): 51% Obama – 47% McCain (62% Minority – 42% Latino)

CA-22 (R-McCarthy): 39% Obama – 59% McCain (54% Minority – 42% Latino)



VRA Implications: The VRA implications are quite significant in that three of the four California counties that require Section 5 preclearance are in this central region. Here’s how I’ve handled each in turn:

Merced County goes from a 42% Latino plurality in the current CA-18 district to a 54% Latino majority on my map. Clearly this more than satisfies Section 5 requirements.

Monterey County goes from the current 50% white/39% Latino CA-17 district to a 46% white/44% Latino district on my map. This is about as Latino as this district will get absent extreme gerrymandering, and it certainly cannot be challenged on ‘retrogression’ grounds.

I’m far more ambivalent about the CA-20 district that I’ve drawn which includes Kings County. On the one hand, it goes from 63% Latino to 66% Latino according to the ACS figures. On the other hand, it drops from a 60% Obama district to a 50% Obama district. This is mainly because it trades heavily Democratic parts of Fresno and Bakersfield with settled Latino communities for rural areas where the Latino population is more comprised of often-transient agricultural workers. In short, the CA-20 district that I’ve drawn may not be deemed as providing Latinos with a true opportunity to elect a “candidate of choice” despite the high Latino percentage. Even more importantly, it may be the case that Latino registration figures are so out of sync with the Census count that this district would still be considered ‘retrogressive’ under Section 5.

To make the long story short, if this district fails to satisfy Section 5 requirements, then obviously the solution is to restore the current dip down to Bakersfield, and the district will obviously become much more Democratic. On the flip-side, I decided to roll with the district I mapped out because that may well be the kind of district that will satisfy the GOP enough to garner three Republican votes for passage by the Commission.

Aside from these Section 5 issues, my map features seven majority-minority districts where there are currently four, and two of these are majority-Latino versus just one on the current map.

Partisan Impact: For the Central Coast the partisan impact is virtually assured: CA-17 remains heavily Democratic, CA-23 becomes somewhat more competitve but still likely Democratic, and CA-24 gets a clear Democratic lean. I’ve seen it mentioned elsewhere that – in maps similar to mine – CA-30 somehow crosses over to take in the more Republican parts of Ventura County as a “political” move to favor Democrats, but this is total nonsense. The parts of Ventura County closer to the LA County border are more Democratic, not less Democratic, and if you instead map CA-24 starting at the LA County line northward you end up with a CA-24 district that’s between 58% to 60% Obama.

For the Central Valley, the partisan effect is even more consequential. My map creates a ‘toss-up’ CA-11 district in San Joaquin & Stanislaus, with perhaps a slight GOP lean, in place of a strongly Democratic seat in the Bay Area. Otherwise, CA-20 and CA-21 also become ‘toss-ups’ with a slight GOP lean. The consequences for 2012 are probably more contingent on where the incumbents decide to run, so I’ll comment further below.

Incumbents: None of the Central Coast incumbents are displaced, though Gallegly might as well be.

As for the Central Valley, we can safely say that McCarthy will end up in whatever district covers the bulk of Kern County. Since it strikes me as implausible that one of the Bay Area Democrats or one of the dispossesed SoCal Republicans would move to the Central Valley, that leaves four incumbents for five districts. The question then is where will they run.

In my mapping scheme above, Cardoza would obviously run in CA-18. Denham would also be in CA-18 (both Cardoza and Denham live in Atwater in Merced County), but that’s the case already and it obviously didn’t stop him from running in the current CA-19 district. That said, on my map Nunes (Visalia) is actually in CA-19 and he would represent more of the new district’s population than would Denham. So, I imagine Nunes would likely end up running there. As for Costa, he lives in Fresno and I think he’d almost surely run in CA-21 unless the new CA-20 district ends up being more like the current CA-20 district.

So, that leaves Denham to run in one of the slight-GOP ‘toss-ups’ (CA-11 or CA-20) leaving the other one vacant.

Los Angeles

My latest map of Los Angeles is below. There isn’t really that much to say about Los Angeles in general, other than to note that Dreier’s CA-26 district is effectively gone to the Inland Empire (and I’ll discuss it there). Besides that, my goal was, yet again, to create as many majority-minority seats as possible, and to make as many of them as reasonable majority-Latino.

It’s also worth explaining why I chose to have three districts cross over from neighboring counties.

Bringing the CA-42 district across from San Bernardino is the best way to maximize the Latino population of that district while also maintaining the Latino proportion of CA-43. If the goal is to maximize majority-Latino districts, then this is obviously the way to go.

As for CA-40 and CA-46, bringing them into LA County to take in the more white parts of Long Beach (CA-46) and the Whittier/Diamond Bar area (CA-40) is the most effective way to maximize the minority percentage of the neighboring LA County seats, while also maximizing the minority percentages of CA-47 and CA-48 in Orange County. So, from a VRA standpoint, this is again the obvious way to go. From a partisan standpoint it makes no difference of consequence.

Anyhow, here are the districts:

CA-25 (R-McKeon): 50% Obama – 48% McCain (53% Minority – 34% Latino)

CA-27 (D-Sherman): 69% Obama – 29% McCain (76% Minority – 60% Latino)

CA-28 (D-Berman): 71% Obama – 27% McCain (53% Minority – 38% Latino)

CA-29 (D-Schiff): 68% Obama – 30% McCain (69% Minority – 22% Asian; 39% Latino)

CA-30 (D-Waxman): 67% Obama – 32% McCain

CA-31 (D-Becerra): 81% Obama – 17% McCain (82% Minority – 62% Latino)

CA-32 (D-Chu): 63% Obama – 35% McCain (82% Minority – 28% Asian; 52% Latino)

CA-33 (D-Bass): 84% Obama – 14% McCain (79% Minority – 54% Latino)

CA-34 (D-Roybal-Allard): 70% Obama – 28% McCain (82% Minority – 67% Latino)

CA-35 (D-Waters): 88% Obama – 10% McCain (92% Minority – 40% AA; 45% Latino)

CA-36 (D-Harman): 63% Obama – 35% McCain

CA-37 (D-Richardson): 80% Obama – 19% McCain (89% Minority – 56% Latino)

CA-38 (D-Napolitano): 64% Obama – 34% McCain (71% Minority – 60% Latino)

CA-39 (D-Sanchez): 64% Obama – 34% McCain (84% Minority – 67% Latino)

VRA Implications: My map features 12 majority-minority seats in LA County which is the same as the current map. However, the Dreier seat which is currently majority-white has been pushed entirely out of LA County to become a majority-Latino Inland Empire seat. On the flip-side, CA-36 (Harmon) has dropped from 54% minority to 43% minority – which is an unavoidable consequence of eliminating the CA-46 coastal strip to take in Palos Verdes. Meanwhile, McKeon’s CA-25 seat has gone from 43% minority to 53% majority-minority. So, to make the long story short, this represents a net gain of one majority-minority seat.

The other significant VRA development is that my map features 8 majority-Latino seats versus 6 in the current map. The current majority-Latino seats have these Latino percentages: 77%, 70%, 69%, 62%, 61%, 55%. My Latino-majority seats have these percentages: 67%, 67%, 62%, 60%, 60%, 56%, 54%, 52%. In short, I’ve chosen the best balance I could come up with between maintaining the population of the current majority-Latino seats versus creating new ones. If the Commission would prefer one or two more seats above 65% then they’ll just create choppier lines. If so, more power to them; I don’t see the need to do so.

Partisan Impact: There’s really not much to say here. LA County will feature 13 heavily Dem seats and one McKeon seat. The Dreier seat, of which a majority lives outside LA County anyhow, will surely be displaced. The CA-25 McKeon seat that I’ve drawn here is basically the most Republican leaning seat that can be drawn in the less-populated northern half of LA County. If it dips south anywhere besides the places where I’ve chosen then the Obama percentage will rise.

Beyond that, there is of course no possibility of a second GOP seat in LA County. However, I do want to comment on what seems to be a widespread misconception that a more GOP leaning CA-36 might be drawn if it were oriented eastward (from Palos Verdes to Long Beach) rather than northward (from Palos Verdes to Santa Monica). In reality, this is simply not true and the only reason why I can figure this mistaken belief has seemingly become common on SSP is because it keeps getting repeated in every California thread despite having no support whatsoever. In actuality, the CA-36 district that I’ve drawn here is the most Republican seat that can viably be drawn in southwest LA, and everything around it is heavily Democratic. The more you shift it toward Long Beach, the more Democratic it becomes.

Incumbents: Perhaps the most interesting part of my LA map is in how it scrambles the incumbents, which I imagine is very likely to be the case with any LA mapping scheme that is less gerrymandered than the current one. Needless to mention, this is only representative of what might happen, but here’s the list of LA districts with who currently represents the district of that number and with where the incumbents end up on my map:

CA-25 (R-McKeon): McKeon (Santa Clarita)

CA-27 (D-Sherman): Vacant

CA-28 (D-Berman): Sherman (Sherman Oaks); Berman (Valley Village); Schiff (Burbank)

CA-29 (D-Schiff): Becerra (Eagle Rock)

CA-30 (D-Waxman): Waxman (Beverly Hills)

CA-31 (D-Becerra): Roybal-Allard (Boyle Heights)

CA-32 (D-Chu): Chu (Monterey Park)

CA-33 (D-Bass): Bass (Culver City); Waters (Hancock Park)

CA-34 (D-Roybal-Allard): Linda Sanchez (Lakewood)

CA-35 (D-Waters): Vacant

CA-36 (D-Harman): Harman (Venice)

CA-37 (D-Richardson): Richardson (Long Beach)

CA-38 (D-Napolitano): Dreier (San Dimas)

CA-39 (D-Sanchez): Napolitano (Norwalk)

How they’d sort it all out is obviously speculative at best, but I do want to make a few observations.

Waters does not live in the current CA-35 district anyhow, so I doubt this makes any difference in that regard. I don’t know if she maintains a property or whatever in Watts, but her current arrangement would obviously work just as well no matter how the new maps are drawn.

Berman and Sherman live very close together and it took some creative map-drawing to keep them in separate districts in 2001. The likelihood of them ending up in the same district is high, especially if the San Fernando Valley is consolidated into a 60%+ majority-Latino district, as seems quite likely.

It doesn’t really matter where Dreier ends up, since he won’t be able to win an LA County district regardless (unless he moves to CA-25), so I presume that if he does end up as the only resident incumbent of a district then one of the Democrats will move over to help sort things out.

Finally, Harman doesn’t actually matter anymore for these purposes. So, it’s worth noting that of the two contenders for the CA-36 seat, Debra Bowen lives in Marina del Rey and would still be in CA-36 on my map. Janice Hahn lives in San Pedro near the Port of Los Angeles which ends up in CA-37 on this map. Since the lower part of CA-36 will almost surely have to shift westward to take in Palos Verdes, it’ll be a very close call which side of the line San Pedro ends up on.

If you’re a Winograd supporter, get real. (She lives in Marina del Rey.)

Orange County & the Inland Empire

The next two maps cover Orange County and the Inland Empire. In my mapping scheme, this also includes CA-26, which is now a Riverside County seat. It’s worth noting that, although CA-26 is more commonly thought of as an LA County seat, a majority of the current CA-26 population actually lives outside LA County. Since the seat anchored by Riverside city is the least congruent with any of the current districts, it makes sense to label that CA-26 for comparative purposes.

My mapping scheme is very straightforward, so there’s not really much to add that I don’t cover below. Since the numbering ends up out of order, here’s how these seats break down by county:

San Bernardino

CA-41 (R-Lewis): 44% Obama – 54% McCain

CA-42 (R-Miller): 55% Obama – 43% McCain (71% Minority – 54% Latino)

CA-43 (D-Baca): 65% Obama – 33% McCain (79% Minority – 61% Latino)

Riverside

CA-26 (R-Dreier): 59% Obama – 39% McCain (70% Minority – 53% Latino)

CA-44 (R-Calvert): 41% Obama – 57% McCain

CA-45 (R-Bono Mack): 50% Obama – 48% McCain (52% Minority – 43% Latino)

Orange

CA-40 (R-Royce): 44% Obama – 54% McCain

CA-46 (R-Rohrabacher): 50% Obama – 48% McCain (52% Minority – 22% Asian; 25% Latino)

CA-47 (D-Sanchez): 56% Obama – 42% McCain (77% Minority – 61% Latino)

CA-48 (R-Campbell): 53% Obama – 45% McCain (59% Minority – 37% Latino)



VRA Implications: On the current map, these 10 seats include only 3 minority-majority seats (CA-40, CA-43, CA-47) two of which are also majority-Latino (CA-43 & CA-47). My map has 7 out of 10 seats as majority-minority and 4 of these are majority-Latino. It’s difficult to envision a more drastic improvement from a VRA standpoint.

Of the current majority-Latino seats, I’ve nudged Baca’s CA-43 up from 58% Latino to 61% Latino. Loretta Sanchez’s CA-47 has dipped from 65% Latino to 61% Latino. I should say that I was somewhat ambivalent about this latter move, but it’s a necessary tradeoff if CA-48 is to become a solid majority-minority seat in its own right. More importantly, I suspect that the actual Census figures will make it quite easy to turn CA-48 into a majority-minority Irvine-based seat alongside an Anaheim-based CA-47 district with a Latino percentage about where it’s at now.

Otherwise, there seems little doubt that three compact majority-Latino seats can be anchored in San Bernardino, Chino, and Riverside. Beyond that, pulling CA-46 out of Palos Verdes virtually assures that it becomes majority-minority – even if only slightly so – and CA-45 is probably even more Latino than the ACS figures project.

Finally, it’s also worth noting that CA-40 and CA-41 are each 51% white on this ACS map, so they may actually be majority-minority in the Census count.

Partisan Impact: The partisan impact for the Inland Empire is perhaps the most substantial aside from the Central Valley. The new Riverside seat is virtually assured to be strongly Dem – and basically replaces the current heavily-gerrymandered Dreier seat. Meanwhile, Gary Miller’s seat goes from a 53% McCain district to a 55% Obama district.

In Orange County, the most significant impact is on Campbell who goes from a 49%O-49%M district to a 53% Obama district. Rohrabacher’s seat becomes just slightly less secure on my map (going from 48%O/50%M to 50%O/48%M) but it’s worth noting that if CA-46 were to take in any more of Long Beach, or if it took in the part of LA County running more along the county border rather than along the Long Beach coastline, then it would become steadily more Democratic.

On the flip-side, CA-40 and CA-44 both become more solidly GOP as white voters get packed here to make way for the majority-minority seats. CA-44 in particular goes from a 50% Obama district to a 57% McCain district.

Incumbents: Several incumbents get displaced by this mapping scheme. Gary Miller lives in Diamond Bar which ends up in the CA-40 district. This would probably be just as well because if something like these maps were the case then it makes far more sense for Miller to challenge Royce (Fullerton) in a primary than to run in the CA-42 district. If CA-40 doesn’t enter LA County, then I think the most likely alternative is for Miller to end up in one of the ultra-Dem LA County districts, so my map is probably about the best-case scenario for him.

This map also draws Lewis (Redlands) and Baca (Rialto) into the same CA-43 district, but I’m sure Lewis could easily run in CA-41 regardless (and he’s reportedly considering retirement anyhow). Finally, Calvert lives in Corona which ends up in CA-42 here, but I’m sure he’d run in the CA-44 district (or its equivalent) no matter where he ends up.

San Diego

Below I’ve included two maps. The first is a broader view of SoCal while the second is a closer view of San Diego so that it’s clear exactly where I’ve drawn the lines.

In my view, this mapping scheme is the most likely arrangement for San Diego County. The city and suburbs of San Diego can clearly anchor two compact seats, and most people seem to agree that Imperial County is most ‘naturally’ attached to San Diego County versus Riverside County. Once those decisions are made, then the rest seems obvious: maximize Latino percentage in CA-51, turn CA-52 into a majority-minority district, and then place CA-50 & CA-49 northward along the coast.

That said, I realize that there’s a contingent that favors an Imperial to Riverside mapping scheme instead, so I’ve actually decided to create an alternative map on that basis. For the sake of keeping things clear, and since the main body of this diary is long enough as it is, I’ll post that separately in the comments.

For now, here are the partisan figures for the five San Diego County districts. Once again, I’ll post further comments after the maps.

CA-49 (R-Issa): 47% Obama – 51% McCain

CA-50 (R-Bilbray): 50% Obama – 49% McCain

CA-51 (D-Filner): 57% Obama – 42% McCain (76% Minority – 61% Latino)

CA-52 (R-Hunter): 54% Obama – 44% McCain (55% Minority – 32% Latino)

CA-53 (D-Davis): 63% Obama – 36% McCain



VRA Implications: The main VRA implications are that I’ve pushed the Latino percentage of CA-51 from 53% to above 60% and I’ve turned CA-52 into a majority-minority district. I chose CA-52 instead of CA-53 because, much to my surprise, when I looked at what remained after I pushed CA-51 to 60% Latino it was clear that CA-52 could much more easily become majority-minority than could CA-53. When I tried doing it with CA-53 instead, I ended up with far more weirdly shaped districts. That said, we can’t rule out the possibility that the actual Census figures will make CA-53 the more viable majority-minority district.

It’s also worth noting that CA-52 was already a 52% Obama district when I initially mapped it based on geographic cohesion without regard to minority percentage. The ‘VRA modification’ just bumped it up, obviously.

Partisan Impact: The main partisan consequence of this mapping scheme is to turn CA-52 from a 53% McCain district to a 54% Obama district.

This is what it comes down to for San Diego, as I see things: CA-51 and CA-53 will be safe Dem no matter what. (I’ve seen a fantasy floating around that pushing up the minority percentage of CA-51 might somehow endanger Susan Davis. This is clearly false. The heavily Dem western parts of San Diego city will anchor a Democratic district no matter what happens with CA-51.) Now, it might well turn out that Filner is subject to a strong Latino primary challenge (assuming he doesn’t run for mayor of San Diego), but that won’t matter in partisan terms.

On the flip-side, CA-49 and CA-50 are likely to remain GOP leaning much as they are now (they each become a bit less GOP on my map, but should still be expected to elect Republicans for the time-being, and certainly to re-elect the current incumbents).

The only real question is what happens with CA-52. In short, the more compact CA-52 becomes the more Democratic it becomes. Since the California guidelines mandate compactness except where VRA requirements suggest otherwise, and especially since a more compact CA-52 district in the eastern suburbs of San Diego city can be made majority-minority (which is not the case if a district similar to the current CA-52 in the San Diego County hinterland were maintained) then I think this is the more likely outcome.

Incumbents: Issa and Bilbray live just 8 miles away from each other, in Vista and Carlsbad respectively, so it’s quite likely they’ll end up mapped in the same district. My map happens to put them both in CA-49 (while my alternative Imperial-to-Riverside map happens to put them both in CA-50). The short of it is that one or the other will very likely have to move or else run in a district where he no longer resides. The other three incumbents are very unlikely to be displaced.

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

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

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

Safe Dem: 26

Likely Dem: 5

Lean Dem: 5

Toss-Up: 5

Lean GOP: 2

Likely GOP: 3

Safe GOP: 7

White-majority: 24

Hispanic-majority: 10

Black-majority: 1

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

Here are the maps and descriptions of each district.

Outer NorCal

Photobucket

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

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

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

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

Demographics: 82% White, 9% Hispanic

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

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

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

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

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

Demographics: 82% White, 10% Hispanic

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

CA-05: Sacramento (Doris Matsui)

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

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

San Francisco Bay Area

Photobucket

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

Demographics: 76% White, 15% Hispanic

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

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

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

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

CA-08: San Francisco (Nancy Pelosi)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CA-15: San Jose (probably Mike Honda)

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

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

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

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

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

Central

Photobucket

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CA-20: Fresno proper (Jim Costa)

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

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

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

Demographics: 46% White, 45% Hispanic

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

CA-22: Bakersfield and Lancaster (Kevin McCarthy)

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

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

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

Demographics: 63% White, 29% Hispanic

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Los Angeles/Orange County/Inland Empire

Photobucket

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

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

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

CA-27: San Fernando (Howard Berman)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Demographics: 51% Black, 42% Hispanic

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

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

Demographics: 86% Hispanic, 10% Black

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CA-38: Long Beach (Linda Sanchez)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Outer SoCal

Photobucket

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

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

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

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

Demographics: 53% Hispanic, 40% White

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

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

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

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

San Diego

Photobucket

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Demographics: 68% White, 22% Hispanic

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

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

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

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

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