I thought it would be interesting to use Dave’s Redistricting App to show that it was possible to create minority-majority districts in places that people might not necessarily expect, yet are indeed possible. I know that most of these districts will probably never be created, but it was an interesting chance to see what districts could be created. Technically, the definition of a majority-minority district according to the Supreme Court is any district that is less than 50% white (a coalition district), not necessarily a majority for one specific group. So some of these districts are +50% for one group, such as black or Hispanic, others have a plurality for another group, while others are just less than 50% white. So here are some of the districts I looked at:

California

Racial stats: 51% Asian, 29% white, 12% Hispanic, 4% other, 3% black

This is an Asian majority district in the Bay Area. While several current districts have an Asian plurality with current Census data, none of them have an Asian majority. This district would probably elect an Asian representative, most likely Rep. Mike Honda, who already represents many Asian areas in San Jose. I think this might be the first Asian majority district to ever exist outside of Hawaii.

Colorado

Racial stats: 51% Hispanic, 37% white, 7% black, 3% Asian, 1% Native American, 1% other

It was actually possible to create a district in the Denver area that is majority-Hispanic. I linked Hispanic areas in the cities of Lakewood, Denver, Commerce City, Longmont, Brighton, and Greeley. Most of the voters come from Diana DeGette’s 1st district and Ed Perlmutter’s 7th district, although Jared Polis’s 2nd district and Betty Markey’s 4th district also lose some voters. I assume this district would elect a Democrat, possibly Diana DeGette, or possibly someone else.

Connecticut

Racial stats: 43% white, 27% black, 24% Hispanic, 3% Asian, 3% other

By linking minority areas in the cities of Bridgeport, New Haven, Waterbury, New Britain, and Hartford, it was possible to create a district that is majority-minority in Connecticut. The district has the homes of John Larson and Rosa DeLauro, and takes in all of the major urban centers in the four eastern and central districts, so it would probably help Republicans in some of the other districts. While the district is less than 50% white, it is almost evenly split between the district’s Hispanic and black populations, so it would be interesting to see what would happen in an election here.

Indiana

Racial stats: 45% black, 43% white, 9% Hispanic, 2% other, 1% Asian

By connecting heavily black areas in Indianapolis and Gary, it is possible to create a district that is plurality (yet not majority) black. I assume that Andre Carson would run here and win, although he would probably be challenged in the primary by Pete Visclosky. However, this district is more Indianapolis, so I think Carson would defeat Visclosky. This district would be incredibly Democratic either way, I’m sure Obama broke 75% here, maybe even 80%.

New Jersey

Racial stats: 39% white, 34% black, 21% Hispanic, 4% Asian, 2% other

This district connects minority areas in Atlantic City, Camden, and Trenton, and could probably be made even less white than this version is. Battle Royale between John Adler and Robert Andrews that would allow a minority candidate to slip through the primary? Thanks to andgarden for this idea.

New Mexico

1st district (blue): 53% Hispanic, 37% white, 5% Native American, 2% other, 2% black, 1% Asian

2nd district (green): 51% Hispanic, 42% white, 4% Native American, 1% black, 1% other, 1% Asian

3rd district (purple): 55% white, 22% Hispanic, 17% Native American, 2% other, 2% black, 1% Asian

As it stands now, all three New Mexico districts are majority-minority, although Dave’s Redistricting App shows a Hispanic majority in only one district, the current NM-02, with updated 2008 numbers. So I wanted to see if it was possible to create not just one, but two Hispanic majority districts. I accomplished this task without too much difficulty, although I admit that it looks a bit strange. The 2nd district remains almost unchanged, although it picks up Torrance County and Hispanic-majority San Miguel County and loses the cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs. Meanwhile, the city of Albuquerque is split in half, along with the northern and eastern edges of the state. The Hispanic western half of Albuquerque as well as other Hispanic areas to the north and east of the 2nd district, as well as Santa Fe go into the 1st district. Meanwhile, the mostly white eastern half of Albuquerque is put into the sprawling 3rd district, which goes from Gallup and Farmington in the northwest all the way down to Hobbs in the southeast.

This would set up an interesting chain of events assuming the three Democratic congressmen currently in office (Heinrich, Teague, and Lujan) were still in office. No one would probably want to run in the new 3rd district, which is the white-majority district and the most Republican of the three. Teague would most likely run in the 2nd district, which is similar to his current district, although he would have to move as his home in Hobbs is now in the 3rd district. Meanwhile, Lujan and Heinrich would probably face off in the 3rd district, although I imagine Lujan would be the favorite since he represents much of this district already and there is now a Hispanic majority in the district. Meanwhile, a Republican would likely win the 3rd district seat, although perhaps I am wrong since New Mexico is a pretty Democratic state on the whole and this district still has significant Hispanic (22%) and Native American (17%) populations. This map would never occur with a Democratic legislature/governor, although perhaps the Republicans would attempt this if they controlled the state government, which is highly unlikely for now.

Ohio

Racial stats: 53% black, 42% white, 2% other, 1% Asian, 1% Hispanic

This district actually inspired the rest of the diary after I thought of it over the summer. This new majority-black district links African-American areas in the cities of Cincinnati, Dayton, and Columbus, and manages to look cleaner than even the current NC-12 (Mel Watt’s district). It would almost certainly elect a black Democrat, and at the same time would take pressure off of other Republicans such as Pat Tiberi and Mike Turner. If Steve Chabot was elected in 2010, he would probably have to run against Boehner or Schmidt in the primary as this district would take up much of the current OH-01’s turf in Cincinnati. If Steve Driehaus hung on in 2010, I think he would probably lose the primary to an African-American, although who knows what would happen.

Also, several people have said that they have been unable to keep OH-10 as a majority-black district in Cleveland without going into Akron.

It is indeed possible, here is a map:

Racial stats: 50% black, 41% white, 5% Hispanic, 2% Asian, 1% other

The main way I did this was by taking a lot of the population from Dennis Kucinich’s district, which puts his district 270,000 people in the red, which makes it almost a given his district will be combined with Sutton’s district in my opinion.

Texas

Racial stats: 44% white, 33% black, 19% Hispanic, 1% Asian, 1% other

I know that there are a lot of pockets of black and Hispanic voters in East Texas, so I wanted to see if it would be possible to make a minority-majority district in East Texas without going into Houston or Dallas at all. So I was able to make a meandering district that picks up minority voters in Galveston, Beaumont, Port Arthur, Orange, Huntsville, Lufkin, Longview, Tyler, Texarkana, and Paris. It looks a bit like Cleo Fields’ old district in neighboring Louisiana, although this district emerges at just 33% black. Still, that might be enough to put a black Democrat through the primary and into office, as the entire district is just 44% white overall and many of those white voters are Republicans and wouldn’t vote in the Democratic primary anyway. I made this district before Dave put in the partisan data, so I haven’t calculated the presidential numbers yet, although I imagine that it was probably in the low 50s for McCain, nowhere near as Republican as the current East Texas districts.

So I know that many of these districts are highly theoretical, but I still thought it was an interesting exercise in seeing what is possible and what may even be required by law someday as voting rights law evolves. Let me know what you think of these districts and this subject!

Some are beginning to talk up the possibility of the GOP not only taking the House but also the Senate this November. To do that they would have to win ten Democratic seats. In my view they currently lead in North Dakota, Nevada, Arkansas, Colorado and Delaware. Illinois and Pennsylvania are too close to call. Despite the loss of Massachusetts this week I still don’t think they will win all of these. But say for the sake of argument they did. They would then need three more from somewhere. Unless they can get fresh challengers in Washington, Wisconsin and more likely Indiana then they would have to win Connecticut, New York AND California to get control. To cut a long story short the gold standard of polling in the Golden State suggests the latter is very unlikely to happen.

Field Poll (1/5-17) MoE 3.3%

General Election

Barbara Boxer (D) 48%

Tom Campbell (R) 38%

Boxer (D) 50%

Carly Fiorina (R) 35%

Boxer (D) 51%

Chuck DeVore (R) 34%

The incumbent has a positive favorability rating of 48-39. The Republicans have far less name ID and only Campbell is in positive territory.

GOP Primary

Campbell 30%

Fiorina 25%

DeVore 6%

Undecided 39%

http://www.field.com/fieldpoll…

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

In my previous post, I noted that almost all the counties President Barack Obama won have become more Democratic since 1992, while almost all the counties Senator John McCain won have become more Republican since 1992.

In fact, comparing maps of the 2008 presidential election and the county changes from 1992 indicates a striking correlation.

Here is the 2008 presidential election:

Here are the changes from the 1992 presidential election:



This hints at a disturbing picture of electoral polarization. More analysis below.

On the one hand, all this is somewhat intuitive. If a Democratic candidate does well in a specific place, he or she probably improved on a previous Democrat’s performance there – and vice versa. Moreover, these maps do not imply that all blue regions became more Democratic (nor the opposite); rural Appalachia, in the most famous instance, has trended sharply Republican, while much of suburban American has gone in the opposite direction.

On the other hand, this phenomenon does not constitute a mathematical rule. If a Democratic candidate wins a county, that doesn’t necessarily imply that he or she improved upon a previous Democrat’s performance. He or she could have done worse but still won; the previous Democrat might have overperformed, or the Republican might have encouraged cross-over voting.

Yet by and large, this has not been the case. Obama practically always outperformed former President Bill Clinton in today’s Democratic counties. Mr. McCain practically always overperformed former President George H. W. Bush in today’s Republican counties.

Taking a look at selected states provides a powerful illustration of this fact.

Here is California:

Here is Colorado:

All this implies something rather disturbing: electoral polarization has been steadily increasing. Obama only improved on Mr. Clinton’s performance in the counties Obama won. McCain only improved on Mr. Bush’s performance in the counties McCain won. The almost total lack of cross-over gain suggests that each party has come to depend on deepening their base, rather than widening the electorate and appealing to moderates.

That America is getting more divided has, of course, been known for a fairly long time. In some ways the maps exaggerate the polarization: 1992 Clinton appealed to many Republicans, while Obama’s strength lay amongst the Democratic base. Then there is the Ross Perot effect, which lowered margins in both party strongholds (e.g. New England, the Plains states).

But perhaps a bit of exaggeration is needed. Polarization has rarely been good for any country, and its increasing prevalence bodes poorly for the future of the United States. A map like this provides a potent illustration of polarization in action; indeed, I have never encountered a more striking image of its increase. Such a picture might do us some good.

(Note: Credit for all maps is given to the NYT; some images have been modified.)

I attempted to create a map of California that benefits Democrats and yet does not involve extreme gerrymandering. This is the result, with which I am quite pleased. Very few of the districts are overt gerrymanders, and for the most part the uglier ones are to meet Voting Rights Act requirements. In the end, I successfully packed most of the Republicans into 5 very solidly Republican districts, freeing up room for 47 districts that should reliably go Democratic barring extenuating circumstances and 1 swing district. The districts are generally organized from north to south, but I will still note the colors of the districts for ease. I will also note races and ethnicities that exist above 5% of the district population (“Hispanic” will be considered separate from the other races). Each district’s population deviates less than 0.1% from the ideal population, and can easily be smoothed out even more if the confines of block groups were removed. I may have made slight tweaks to some of the districts, but unless noted, the population percentages change by 2% at most.

California at large

Sacramento Valley

San Francisco Bay Area

Central Valley

Urban Los Angeles (the districts in the southeast, at the Orange County border, look a little different because I made some tweaks and didn’t feel like making the other maps over again; the districts shown in this map are the ones I discuss)

Orange County

Inland Empire

San Diego

District 1 (blue)

Incumbent: Mike Thompson (D)

65% white, 7% Asian, 20% Hispanic

This is the only district in northern California that is overtly gerrymandered, but the small strip running through Sacramento and Placer Counties can easily be widened. Napa and Yolo Counties, which are in the current 1st district, account for about 45% of the new district, and Thompson should also be comfortable with the parts of Nevada County in the new district; the cities of Truckee and Nevada City are very liberal, and Grass Valley is a swingish place. The Placer County area shouldn’t be too conservative, since it includes the minority-rich parts of Roseville and all of Auburn and the Lake Tahoe area in the east. This gives the district the chance to neutralize conservative Citrus Heights in Sacramento County.

District 2 (green)

Incumbent: None

77% white, 11% Hispanic

Technically, this district has no incumbent, because Wally Herger (R), who represents much of the current district, lives in Chico. However, he will probably choose to run in this dark-red district, which includes Redding, lumber country in the north, and conservative Sacramento suburbs. He may face some primary competition from Tom McClintock of the 4th district, who represents the Sacramento suburbs and ran his first race for that district from Ventura County.

District 3 (purple)

Incumbent: Dan Lungren (R), Tom McClintock (R)

43% white, 9% black, 16% Asian, 26% Hispanic

This district becomes much more diverse and Democratic. It drops many conservative parts in northwestern Sacramento County and its two counties in the Sierras, Amador and Calaveras, in exchange for minority portions of Elk Grove and Sacramento that are currently packed into the 5th district and heavily Hispanic parts of Stockton. Obama should have won this district comfortably in 2008, and considering Lungren only won by 5% against Bill Durston that year, he should certainly lose here.

District 4 (red)

Incumbent: Wally Herger (R)

67% white, 22% Hispanic

The 4th district is effectively eliminated and replaced here, sharing only a small portion of Butte County and based in the northern exurban parts of the San Francisco Bay Area. It covers Santa Rosa in Sonoma County, and the extremely strongly Democratic town of Sebastopol. Although the Sonoma County part is only about 35% of the district, it is fiercely partisan, voting for Obama with about 75% of the vote, while the rest of the district is almost exactly even, and whichever Democrat decides to run here should win easily.

District 5 (yellow)

Incumbent: Doris Matsui (D)

48% white, 11% black, 14% Asian, 21% Hispanic

All of Sacramento is no longer packed into this district, and it recedes entirely from Elk Grove. Instead, it marches east all the way to Folsom, picking up some very conservative territory along the way. Overall, Obama should still have received over 60% of the vote here, and if Matsui is unhappy with it, it can be expanded southward a little bit. A healthy minority population should forestall that, though.

District 6 (teal)

Incumbent: Lynn Woolsey (D)

74% white, 15% Hispanic

Woolsey’s district loses most of Sonoma County in exchange for less-progressive areas in the north, but in California, “less progressive” means Obama won with about 65% of the vote. It eats into a small liberal edge of Siskiyou County, probably ski resorts. In general, it takes Lynn Woolsey’s home city of Petaluma and various “conservative” areas in Sonoma County, which amounts to voting for Obama with about 70%. In theory, this district could be extended further into the mountains and free up more of Sonoma County for the 4th district, but that would look kind of bad.

District 7 (gray)

Incumbent: George Miller (D)

41% white, 9% black, 14% Asian, 29% Hispanic

The 7th district drops Richmond and San Pablo, two very progressive cities by the bay, and gains the parts of Stockton that aren’t in the 3rd district. This causes a large drop in the black population, but a corresponding gain in the Hispanic population. Even with the addition of very rich areas in interior Contra Costa County, George Miller should be very comfortable in this strongly liberal district.

District 8 (periwinkle)

Incumbent: Nancy Pelosi (D)

48% white, 30% Asian, 14% Hispanic

Nancy Pelosi is living proof that Democrats should elect their leaders from safe districts; Tom Foley lost in 1994, Tom Daschle lost in 2004, Harry Reid is in serious danger in 2010. But Nancy Pelosi is probably safe even if God is proven to be real. This district keeps her residence in the Pacific Heights neighborhood, but shifts west, probably losing a few points of Democratic performance, but nothing to worry about at all. The westward move subtly benefits Democrats from the Central Valley, as will be revealed in a while.

District 9 (light blue)

Incumbent: Barbara Lee (D)

39% white, 17% black, 23% Asian, 16% Hispanic

The 9th district now skips across the Bay Bridge into San Francisco and takes whatever is not occupied by Nancy Pelosi. It absorbs Berkeley and most of Oakland, but no longer all of it, and it fills in the rest of its population requirements with filthy rich cities in central Contra Costa County, inhabited by voters who tend to be socially liberal but fiscally moderate. The 11th district is sucked into eastern Oakland and becomes safely Democratic as a result of this, and that reverberates through the rest of the Central Valley. The drop in the black population is unfortunate, though; to fix that, the 9th can give Berkeley to the 11th in exchange for the rest of Oakland, but that makes the lines messier.

District 10 (pink)

Incumbent: John Garamendi (D)

39% white, 15% black, 13% Asian, 27% Hispanic

Garamendi’s district is substantially reconfigured to meet his needs, since the current version of the district was drawn for Ellen Tauscher, who resigned to work in the State Department. All of Solano County is present, constituting a majority of the district’s population. The parts in the Central Valley contain Garamendi’s home in Sacramento County and the very conservative city of Lodi in San Joaquin County. The tendril to the west counterbalances Lodi’s influence with San Pablo and Richmond, which are like mini-Oaklands in both ethnic composition and political leanings.

District 11 (yellow-green)

Incumbent: Jerry McNerney (D)

58% white, 8% black, 10% Asian, 20% Hispanic

The new 11th district is more compact and much more Democratic than the current district, and can be viewed as having three prongs. The prong in San Joaquin County covers Republican-tilting Manteca, fast-growing suburban city Tracy, and some deep red regions in the east. The Contra Costa wing drops Danville and San Ramon and instead picks up parts of Concord, Walnut Creek, and Lafayette. However, the Alameda wing is the most important part; it includes Pleasanton, McNerney’s home, and about a fifth of Oakland, responsible for the strong progressiveness of this district.

District 12 (pastel blue)

Incumbent: Jackie Speier (D)

44% white, 25% Asian, 23% Hispanic

The new 12th district is probably one of the cleanest and most logical in the nation. It takes in all of suburban and wealthy San Mateo County except Atherton, where Anna Eshoo lives, and a section of Menlo Park. It might be possible by combining certain parts of San Francisco with northern San Mateo County to make an Asian-plurality district, but there isn’t much reason for doing so.

District 13 (tan)

Incumbent: Pete Stark (D)

34% white, 6% black, 31% Asian, 23% Hispanic

The composition of this district doesn’t change significantly; it just moves north a little as Barbara Lee’s San Francisco addition sucks it in. It maintains most of Fremont, all of Hayward, and the city of Alameda. A few more adjustments can easily makes this district Asian-plurality, but that wouldn’t really affect anything. Pete Stark is one of my personal favorite representatives, as the only openly atheist (imagine a country where “openly atheist” is more damning than “openly gay”) congressman.

District 14 (olive)

Incumbent: Anna Eshoo (D)

50% white, 31% Asian, 13% Hispanic

Anna Eshoo may want to swap a few tentacles of territory with Jackie Speier, since her base is in San Mateo County, but from an interparty standpoint, Eshoo is in no danger. This new district adds the city of Santa Clara and more of San Jose to become the “Silicon Valley district”. Relatively conservative (relative to the rest of Santa Clara County) Saratoga and Monte Sereno are also included.

District 15 (orange)

Incumbent: Mike Honda (D)

34% white, 34% Asian, 25% Hispanic

This district is one of two newly Asian-plurality districts, along with the 32nd. Although 12% of California’s population is Asian, suggesting about 5 majority Asian districts, it is actually nigh impossible to create even one majority Asian district without drawing lines that are absurd and would be shot down in court because the Asian population is so thoroughly distributed throughout the coastal areas. The southern tendril now contains Morgan Hill instead of Gilroy.

District 16 (bright green)

Incumbent: Zoe Lofgren (D)

30% white, 16% Asian, 46% Hispanic

Instead of being entirely confined to Santa Clara County and wasting precious votes, this district now takes in a generally swing part of Stanislaus County. However, the Hispanic part of San Jose occupies 45% of the population, ensuring that the new 16th is still safe for Democrats. There is a very strong chance that Lofgren will be replaced by a Hispanic representative when she retires.

District 17 (indigo)

Incumbent: Sam Farr (D)

58% white, 6% Asian, 28% Hispanic

The general shape of the new 17th district was inspired by Abel Maldonado (R)’s State Senate district, but made more Democratic. Starting from downtown San Jose, it tracks toward coastal Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties, picking up very white, very progressive, very high-turnout areas around Monterey Bay. In the south, it takes in Republican parts of inland San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties. Paso Robles, Atascadero, Orcutt, and part of Lompoc are neutralized, allowing the 22nd district to soak up more Republicans elsewhere and the 24th to transform into a Democratic stronghold.

District 18 (bright yellow)

Incumbent: Dennis Cardoza (D)

33% white, 56% Hispanic

More Hispanics are shoveled into the 18th, mostly from Watsonville and Salinas, both strongly Democratic cities. It no longer goes through Stockton and Modesto, but expands in Madera County and occupies the Hispanic areas of Turlock. It would not be a surprise if Obama won within the high 60s in this district, and Dennis Cardoza either needs to vote more liberally, or fall to a primary challenge. In a stroke of irony, the 18th now, like the 17th, resembles a Democratic-leaning State Senate district occupied by a Republican.

District 19 (dull green)

Incumbent: George Radanovich (R)

73% white, 16% Hispanic

George Radanovich’s current district, which Obama lost by only 6%, has far too many wasted Democratic votes; in fact, Obama won the Fresno County portion. The new form stacks up all the toxic territory that can’t be effectively cleaned up by the Bay Area. It recedes a bit from Stanislaus County, adds Clovis and white areas in Fresno, and takes Sacramento exurbs in El Dorado County, while staying out of Democratic South Lake Tahoe.

District 20 (light pink)

Incumbent: Jim Costa (D)

24% white, 5% black, 8% Asian, 59% Hispanic

Kings County and Bakersfield are dumped in favor of more of Fresno County and all of San Benito County. There is not really a net difference in Democratic performance, and Jim Costa is safe for as long as he wants to be. However, this district can easily be made more Democratic by trading more white parts of Fresno to the slightly packed 18th in exchange for Salinas. However, it seems more logical to pack the 18th to force Cardoza left, and Costa is safe anyways. If Watsonville, Gilroy, and Salinas are divided among two districts, they will shift the districts left, but not enough to put either Cardoza or Costa in danger of a primary.

District 21 (dark red)

Incumbent: Devin Nunes (R)

18% white, 5% black, 70% Hispanic

There are just enough Democratic votes left in the Central Valley to support an additional Democratic district. The demographics are a little deceptive, since many of the Hispanics do not vote, and those who do tend to tilt socially conservative, but Devin Nunes, whose home in Tulare is probably in this district, will probably be turned out of office nevertheless. The shape of the district is a bit ragged, but should be protected by the Voting Rights Act, since the Hispanic population growth should demand an additional district. A few more Democratic votes can be milked out by spilling into inland Monterey County, if that is necessary.

District 22 (brown)

Incumbent: Kevin McCarthy (R)

59% white, 29% Hispanic

This is easily the most conservative congressional district in California, which is surprising given its large Hispanic population, evidencing just how few of those Hispanics actually vote. It fits around the 21st district in Kings, Tulare, and Kern Counties, and includes a few sparsely populated areas of Los Angeles County for population purposes. The spike into inland San Luis Obispo County is unnecessary now, since the 17th district has it covered. The Los Angeles County parts can be removed and replicated in San Bernardino County, where they matter a tiny bit more, but it’s only 11 000 people anyways, and it would look worse.

District 23 (light blue)

Incumbent: Lois Capps (D)

46% white, 5% Asian, 44% Hispanic

This sliver along the coastline fattens slightly in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties, but still keeps its general shape. It can be thickened considerably more without any real difference in composition if block groups could be split in the application, since it borders some very sparsely populated areas covered by very large block groups. The district still goes into Oxnard, to make sure it is stable; there isn’t a better place to put those Democratic votes anyways, since the rest of Ventura County can be mixed and matched with very liberal West Los Angeles. It becomes a tad more Hispanic, but not enough to form a plurality.

District 24 (dark purple)

Incumbent: None

57% white, 7% Asian, 30% Hispanic

Although the new 24th district maintains most of Elton Gallegly’s territory, there are some major differences. Republican Simi Valley is clipped out, removing Gallegly’s home in the process, and the ultra-conservative parts of inland Santa Barbara County, like Orcutt, are neutralized by the 17th district. To make up for the lost population, 40% of the district spills into Los Angeles County, which sets its tone as a new Democratic stronghold.

District 25 (pastel pink)

Incumbent: None

25% white, 11% Asian, 60% Hispanic

The 25th district is eliminated and replaced in this district located in southeastern Los Angeles, cobbled together from various Hispanic areas left behind by the districts stretching into Orange County. The 25th itself snakes into Orange County, picking up most of Yorba Linda and Brea, both strongly conservative, and moderate La Habra. The very Hispanic parts of Los Angeles County, which make up over 70% of the district, compensate more than enough for the poisonous Orange County portion, though, and this district should be ready for a new Democratic congressman.

District 26 (dark gray)

Incumbent: David Dreier (R)

28% white, 7% black, 6% Asian, 56% Hispanic

Some conservative-leaning suburbs north of Los Angeles, such as Arcadia and Glendora, are removed, but San Dimas, where David Dreier lives, remains. The pink city of Chino is added, but more importantly, the 26th now pushes into Pomona and Fontana, and adds all of Ontario. This pushes it to majority Hispanic status. If it seems to need some reinforcement, it can swap Rancho Cucamonga with the 43rd district, which has a larger Hispanic majority and more blacks.

District 27 (aquamarine)

Incumbent: Brad Sherman (D), Buck McKeon (R)

45% white, 9% Asian, 39% Hispanic

Brad Sherman’s district adds Santa Clarita to the north and drops the appendage that stretches into Burbank. Almost 70% of the new district is Sherman’s old territory, and it takes a little from the even more Democratic 28th district, which should be more than enough to force Buck McKeon into retirement. The white population inches up a tad and the Hispanic population does not increase much, which is good, since Sherman seems to have an abnormal fear of being knocked off by a Hispanic candidate in a primary.

District 28 (lavender)

Incumbent: Howard Berman

34% white, 7% black, 5% Asian, 49% Hispanic

40% of this district is now Lancaster and Palmdale; the former tilts Republican but was won by Obama, whereas the latter tilts Democratic. Generally, the new northern portion is a wash. The southern portion, which contains most of Berman’s current territory, is ardently Democratic, though, and easily outweighs the north’s swingish tendencies. In fact, the new 28th district can swap some territory with the new 27th if Brad Sherman thinks he isn’t safe there.

District 29 (pastel green)

Incumbent: Adam Schiff (D)

47% white, 12% Asian, 34% Hispanic

The 29th district contracts into a round little thing and shifts substantially west, but, of course, remains as Democratic as one would expect for a district in the midst of the Los Angeles area. It now includes all of Glendale, Burbank, and La Canada Flintridge, and eats significantly into Los Angeles. It might gain a few points or lose a few points of Democratic performance, but either way, Schiff should be well-established here.

District 30 (pastel pink)

Incumbent: Henry Waxman (D), Elton Gallegly (R)

73% white, 9% Asian, 12% Hispanic

Henry Waxman’s district sneaks into Ventura County and snaps up Republican-leaning Simi Valley and about two-thirds of equally conservative Camarillo. Even though Gallegly lives here, he would certainly lose to even a boiled owl with a D after its name, so of course Waxman is safe… oh wait… Anyways, the rich progressive areas around Hollywood steel the 30th against any potential Republican incursions. Interestingly, the Ventura County portion is less white than the Los Angeles County portion; the whites around Hollywood are the kind who are among the most reliable and socially liberal in the nation.

District 31 (pastel yellow)

Incumbent: Xavier Becerra (D)

28% white, 7% black, 11% Asian, 50% Hispanic

This district is kind of like the old 25th district in how geographically misleading it is. It connects moderately conservative areas in San Bernardino County, like Victorville, Upland, and a slice of Rancho Cucamonga, to central Los Angeles, using the vast Angeles National Forest. It also includes the minority-heavy western half of Pasadena. The whites in this district are a bit more liberal than is typical, since many hail from Pasadena.

District 32 (red-orange)

Incumbent: Judy Chu (D), Gary Miller (R)

18% white, 44% Asian, 33% Hispanic

The 32nd district changes significantly to accommodate Judy Chu, perhaps becoming a little less Democratic, but also much more Asian. It takes Walnut from the 26th district and Gary Miller’s home city of Diamond Bar, both heavily Asian municipalities, and then meanders through a bunch of Asian neighborhoods toward Monterey Park. This is probably the only district outside of Hawaii that would consistently elect an Asian representative; most Asians have no problem voting for a white candidate where the white population is high, but here it gets forced down by the substantial Hispanic population, and the Hispanic population is not large enough to win against the Asian population.

District 33 (pastel blue)

Incumbent: Diane Watson (D)

15% white, 23% black, 13% Asian, 44% Hispanic

The 33rd district loses a white tentacle to the north and picks up some whites to the east, and does not change substantially. It’s actually kind of sad that so many Democrats are locked into this festering district in the heart of urban Los Angeles. Hispanic population growth reduces the relative number of blacks, but blacks should still be dominant, considering how few of the Hispanics actually vote.

District 34 (pastel green)

Incumbent: Lucille Roybal-Allard (D)

7% white, 5% black, 6% Asian, 79% Hispanic

The 34th district will probably continue to be the most Hispanic district in the nation. It could be a good idea to “eliminate” this district, split it up into 4-6 chunks, and give Roybal-Allard one of them, to distribute the votes more efficiently and make more Hispanic-majority districts, but it doesn’t particularly matter, since every one of the Los Angeles districts is safely Democratic.

District 35 (pastel purple)

Incumbent: Maxine Waters (D)

20% white, 20% black, 10% Asian, 47% Hispanic

By taking in the white and rather Republican Palos Verdes Peninsula, the 35th district preserves some semblance of African-American voting power against by keeping the Hispanic population from attaining a majority of the district’s total population. Still, Maxine Waters will very likely be replaced by a Hispanic representative when she retires, and it’s pretty much impossible to do anything about that. There once was a time when the black population constituted a greater percentage, but now it’s constantly dwindling.

District 36 (yellow-orange)

Incumbent: Jane Harman (D)

35% white, 18% black, 10% Asian, 33% Hispanic

Jane Harman’s recent voting record has shifted to the left, but she still has a lot of problems and scandals to deal with. This district should ensure that her shift to the left is not temporary. The northern part of Maxine Waters’s district, which was left behind so the 35th could absorb the Palos Verdes Peninsula, including the city of Inglewood and parts of interior Los Angeles, is added. The population should be white enough to maintain Harman in a primary if she continues to improve, but should her former centrism return, she’ll easily be knocked off by a progressive minority candidate, considering many of the whites are Republicans.

District 37 (light pastel blue)

Incumbent: Laura Richardson (D)

30% white, 8% black, 21% Asian, 36% Hispanic

This diverse district is cobbled together from most of Long Beach, all of Paramount for extra Democratic votes, and Westminster and Fountain Valley in Orange County. The Orange County cities have a large Asian population, but they’re largely Vietnamese and conservative. Hopefully Laura Richardson, who has attracted too much controversy for a nondescript heavily Democratic district in an urban area, will be primaried out.

District 38 (blue-green)

Incumbent: Grace Napolitano (D), Ed Royce (R)

29% white, 11% Asian, 55% Hispanic

Like many other districts, Grace Napolitano’s new 38th district combines a moderately conservative part of Orange County with a strongly Democratic and Hispanic part of Los Angeles County. Pico Rivera and Norwalk cause the Democratic percentage to shoot up, which overrides the pinkish regions of Orange County, including Fullerton, Placentia, and Buena Park. Ed Royce is inadvertently put into the district, but he will be flattened by Napolitano easily in this Hispanic-majority district.

District 39 (light tan-yellow)

Incumbent: Linda Sanchez (D)

25% white, 19% Asian, 48% Hispanic

Linda Sanchez’s new district is very similar to the 38th, except its Orange County parts are more Asian. It includes large Vietnamese communities in Garden Grove and takes a chunk of Anaheim. The 39th district needs to extend deeply into the heart of Los Angeles County because the border cities of Artesia, Lakewood, and Cerritos are not super-liberal. However, South Gate and the unincorporated region just south of Huntington Park are, and secure the district for Sanchez, who fortuitously is placed right next to her sister, Loretta.

District 40 (red-brown)

Incumbent: none

29% white, 10% Asian, 56% Hispanic

What is currently the 40th district, in Orange County, is completely dissected and relocated into central Los Angeles County. Its basic purpose is to contain all of the non-Asian areas north of Judy Chu’s 32nd district. Glendora, at the east end, is rich and Republican, but is far outweighed by Pasadena, Monrovia, Los Angeles, and the unincorporated region south of Los Angeles. If it needs to be made thicker, it can take a strip of Angeles National Forest during the actual mapping and add barely any people.

District 41 (pastel gray)

Incumbent: Jerry Lewis (R)

68% white, 22% Hispanic

The 41st district is the main sponge for Republican votes in the Inland Empire. It takes the white parts of Murrieta, Temecula, Redlands, Hemet, and San Jacinto, and all of Hesperia, Apple Valley, Yucaipa, Yucca Valley, Calimesa, and others. It also curves into Indian Wells, Rancho Mirage, La Quinta, and Palm Desert in the Coachella Valley. Its lines might seem awkward, but that’s partially because the block groups in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties tend to be quite large.

District 42 (lime green)

Incumbent: None

36% white, 9% black, 9% Asian, 41% Hispanic

The 42nd district is almost completely displaced, sharing only the city of Chino Hills and a small edge of Orange County with the current 42nd district. It contains all of Perris and Moreno Valley, which have surprisingly large black populations. It strikes through the minority-heavy blocks of Murrieta and Temecula, and then takes a small part of Yorba Linda in order to get to Los Angeles County. 60 000 people from Pomona strengthen Democrats further and is responsible for the Hispanic plurality.

District 43 (magenta)

Incumbent: Joe Baca (D)

20% white, 12% black, 5% Asian, 59% Hispanics

The 43rd district edges east into the Hispanic parts of Redlands, adding Highlands and dropping Ontario. Joe Baca remains perfectly safe here, and in fact this district is probably still quite stacked with Democratic votes. Baca can share the wealth with the 44th district if California politicians think that a Democrat would have a hard time getting elected there.

District 44 (dark magenta)

Incumbent: Ken Calvert (R)

36% white, 5% black, 7% Asian, 47% Hispanic

The population of the redistricted 44th district lies entirely within the current 44th district, a testament to the Inland Empire’s powerful growth. It includes all of the city of Riverside and most of Corona, where Ken Calvert lives. The slab of Orange County that is removed, including San Juan Capistrano and San Clemente, was responsible for keeping Calvert in Congress in 2008, so he will no doubt have significant problems surviving in the Democratic part of his district.

District 45 (turquoise)

Incumbent: Mary Bono Mack (R)

39% white, 50% Hispanic

The new incarnation of the 45th district may look absurd, stretching from the Inland Empire all the way to Lake Tahoe, but there actually is a strong community-of-interest argument for putting the resort areas in the same district. It may seem counterintuitive to cut Democratic Moreno Valley out of the district, but strongly conservative Murrieta is also removed. Only the minority parts of Hemet and San Jacinto remain, while Desert Hot Springs and minority parts of Banning and Beaumont are included. Due in part to natural growth, Hispanics attain a majority of the population.

District 46 (pastel orange red)

Incumbent: Dana Rohrabacher (R)

39% white, 12% black, 10% white, 35% Hispanic

Ironically, this district becomes more Democratic even while swapping swing city Costa Mesa for very Republican Newport Beach. It maintains all of Huntington Beach and Seal Beach (interestingly, Huntington Beach, which is largely white, recorded the most votes of any city in Orange County in 2008, even more than Anaheim, which is much more populous), and the strip across coastal Long Beach is widened. Instead of proceeding to the Palos Verdes Peninsula, though, the new 46th turns north and adds all of Compton, Carson, and Lynwood; Compton was the most Democratic city in California in 2008!

District 47 (light lavender)

Incumbent: Loretta Sanchez (D)

16% white, 12% Asian, 68% Hispanic

The 47th district expands to include all of Santa Ana, and flows toward Anaheim via Orange rather than via Garden Grove. That causes a slight decrease in the Asian population and a corresponding increase in the Hispanic population. This district may not seem especially stable, considering the capricious turnout of the Latino base, but it should gradually become more and more Democratic as Hispanic participation in the political process increases.

District 48 (pastel orange)

Incumbent: John Campbell (R)

58% white, 15% Asian, 22% Hispanic

John Campbell’s district is probably the most swingish of all the new districts. Obama’s performance edges up several points with the removal of Newport Beach and most of Lake Forest, replaced by Costa Mesa and a slice of Orange. With Irvine’s abrupt shift leftward and the Laguna region’s social liberalism, John Campbell’s days in Congress are probably numbered. If a candidate about as strong as Beth Krom were to run in 2012, with Obama’s coattails, Campbell would probably lose.

District 49 (pastel red-brown)

Incumbent: Darrell Issa (R), Brian Bilbray (R), Duncan Hunter (R)

74% white, 6% Asian, 15% Hispanic

The Republican primary in this ultra-conservative, ultra-Republican district should be very interesting to watch, as each candidate tries to appeal to the Orange County part as the tiebreaker. Darrell Issa’s base is the northern part of the district within San Diego, Brian Bilbray’s the left leg, and Duncan Hunter’s the right leg. Issa probably has the upper hand in the Orange County area, since he represents Riverside County adjacent to it, but he also has the smallest preexisting base.

District 50 (metallic blue)

Incumbent: None

49% white, 13% Asian, 30% Hispanic

This is one of the few districts that is very oddly shaped. Anchored in San Diego, it drifts north on two legs, picking up the parts of the coastal cities that are not included in the 53rd district and the minority parts of Vista and Escondido. It can dive further into San Diego if it is seen as necessary, but it has already dropped loads of conservative territory.

District 51 (dark brown)

Incumbent: Bob Filner (D)

33% white, 7% Asian, 53% Hispanic

The tendril along the United States-Mexico borderline is widened to comprise of a vast majority of San Diego County’s area. It still includes almost all of Chula Vista and the southern foot of San Diego, but National City is removed in favor of more conservative Coronado and Imperial Beach, covering all of California’s border with Mexico. A small abutment juts into the Hispanic parts of El Cajon. Even if Democratic performance decreases several points, the presence of Democratic and heavily Hispanic Imperial County will keep Filner safe.

District 52 (olive green)

Incumbent: None

40% white, 9% black, 14% Asian, 32% Hispanic

The 52nd district contracts by shedding sparsely populated regions in outer San Diego County and absorbs many Hispanic parts of San Diego. Santee and Poway are also milked for what they’re worth. In total, the black and Hispanic parts probably pushes the district to at least the upper 50s in Obama performance, and if Duncan Hunter even tries here, he’ll be squashed.

District 53 (metallic gray) (God I hate working with this color)

Incumbent: Susan Davis (D)

58% white, 8% Asian, 26% Hispanic

The 53rd district is removed from inner San Diego city and made more of a coastline district. The high white population may seem daunting, but coastal San Diego whites tend to be much more liberal than their inland counterparts. Susan Davis has experience winning in a lean Democratic district (that’s how she was elected in 2000), so even if this district is much less Democratic than before, she should have very little difficulty.

While it may feel like we wrapped up the election cycle on Tuesday, there are always more elections to come. This post covers the special and runoff legislative races coming up in the next month. There are three other important races, the Mass. Senate race and the Houston and Atlanta mayoral runoff races, that will be covered in a future post.

Dems have a chance at picking up one seat in California, two in Tennessee and one in Kentucky, while they are defending another seat in Kentucky, one in Georgia and one in Iowa. There are also two interesting inter-party fights going on in the Georgia runoffs.

This is cross posted on my new blog dedicated to following special elections and culling absentee ballot information from all states into one spot to increase turnout in local races. To read more about each race and learn more about the candidates, click here.

I am sure I left out some races – I hope you will let everyone know about them in the comments and I will be sure to write about them shortly

For the races, join me below the jump.

November 17 – CA Assembly 72 – This doesn’t mean much around these here parts, but there is a primary in Orange County for the seat of Republican Mike Duvall, who resigned due to a sex scandal earlier this year.

Three Republicans are vying for the chance to take on the Democratic candidate, John MacMurray, a teacher in La Habra, and the Green Party Candidate, Jane Rands. MacMurray’s website is here.

The general election will be held on January 12.

———————————————

On November 24, Democrats are defending a seat in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. (HD 33) Democrats chose Kirsten Running-Marquardt as their candidate. A former aide to Congressman David Loebsack, her background is detailed here.

Republicans nominated Josh Thurston, an Iraq War veteran and Cargill employee

——————————————-



December 1 – Voters go back to work in Georgia for legislative runoffs and there are two special elections in Tennessee.

In Georgia, four races are being voted on in different parts of the state. Thanks to TheUnknown285 for all his help on these races.

SD 35

This Atlanta-based Senate district was represented by Kasim Reed, who is locked in a runoff race for Mayor of Atlanta, also to be held on December 1. Outside of parts of Atlanta, the district also represents:

College Park, Douglasville, East Point, Fairburn, Hapeville, Lithia Springs, Palmetto, and Union City

The two remaining candidates are Donzella James and Torrey Johnson,  both Democrats. James, who took the most votes in the first vote on December 3 is attempting to return to the State Senate after serving from 1994-2002. Johnson is an ordained Lutheran minister seeking his first elected office.

HD 58

To see a map of the Georgia House Districts, click http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg…

There is a runoff  in GA HD 58 between two Democrats. Asha Jackson faces Simone Bell in this Atlanta-based district.

HD 129

This district is comprised of most of Harris County and parts of Troup County and Muscogee County.

A pair of Republicans, Kip Smith and Steve Earles are facing off in this election.

HD 141

This district is made up of all of Baldwin County and a small piece of Putnam County. The Democratic incumbent did not run for reelection and so independent candidate Rusty Kidd will square off against Democrat Darrell Black.

———————————————-

In Tennessee, specifically East Memphis, voters will go to the polls to elect a new state senator to fill the seat of Republican Paul Stanley, SD 31, who resigned earlier this year. Many of the voters will also be picking in the primary for the 83rd House District in a  seat resigned by Republican Brian Kelsey, a candidate for Stanley’s seat.

In the State Senate race, covering covers most of Bartlett, almost all of Cordova and Germantown, a few East Memphis precincts and parts of Hickory Hill, Democrat Adrienne Pakis-Gillon is hoping to keep the seat in her party’s hands. A Shelby County Democratic Party Executive Committee Member, her website can be found at http://www.voteadrienne.com/.

The Republican candidate is former State Representative Brian Kelsey who was the Republican floor leader in the House for 2007-2008.

For the House race primary vacated by Kelsey, the candidates are Republicans Mark White and John Pellioccitti, Democrats Guthrie Castle and Ivan Faulkner and Independent John Andreucetti.

——————————————

December 8 – There are two races in Kentucky and one in Arkansas.

KY SD 14 and HD 96

Two races will be voted on December 8th in Kentucky. The State Senate race, located in a district in central Kentucky and comprised of Marion, Mercer, Nelson, Taylor and Washington counties, resulted from Republican Senator Dan Kelly being named to a circuit court judgeship.

The Republican nominee for SD-14 is State Representative Jimmy Higdon from Lebanon, KY.

The Democratic candidate is former State Representative Jodie Haydon, who is looking to return to the legislature after retiring from the House in 2004.

The House race is in north-east Kentucky, near the Ohio border, covering Lewis and Carter counties. Democratic Representative Robin Webb resigned the post after being elected to a State Senate seat.

In the House race, Democrats nominated Barry Webb, while Republicans chose Jill York.

———————————————

AR SD 4

There will be a special election held in District 4, which includes all of Yell County, the southern portion of Pope County and the eastern portion of Logan County. Republican Senator Sharon Trusty is resigning her seat.

There are three candidates on the ballot. Former State Representative Michael Lamoureux is attempting to return to the State House as the Republican candidate.

John Burnett is a Russellville Attorney and is running as a Democrat.

Tachany C. Evans is the Independent candidate and a member of the Board of Directors for Help Network, Inc.

——————————

That’s all for this time. Thanks for reading. I look forward to hearing about more races I should include and cover. To read more about each race and learn more about the candidates, click here.

(Cross-posted on Calitics and the Daily Kos)

Back in August I posted a diary here re. redistricting California:

http://www.swingstateproject.c…

Since that time, Dave’s Redistricting Application has become available for the state.  The Application is an invaluable tool in doing these maps.  It has helped me greatly in trying to come up with a new, better version of a plan for the state.  I have also taken reader comments from my last diary into consideration in drawing this new plan for California.  The comments have helped me greatly in terms of refining the districts here.  As several readers rightfully noted, several of the districts I drew last time were not Democratic enough to assure that they would be virtually guaranteed to elect Democrats, and parts of the previous map were too gerrymandered.  Here’s my new version …

Like last time, I had several main goals in mind when redistricting California:

1.  Increase Democratic representation in the state delegation.

2.  Draw relatively compact districts that largely adhere to county and community lines.

3.  Increase number of minority-majority districts in the state.

4.  Protect incumbents (at least the Democratic ones).  Towards this goal, I have added a “measuring stick” of sorts to the analysis below.  For each district I provide a “TTP” number (Territory Transfer Percentage – for lack of a better label !) which does nothing more than provide the percentage of the new district’s territory (in terms of population) that was formerly a part of the current district (the Application makes this really easy.)  So, for example, in CA-7, the “TTP” is 79.  The proposed district contains much of the same territory as the current district, and 79% of the new district’s population was formerly a part of the old district; in other words, George Miller would be looking at a district where 79% of his new constituents are the same as his old constituents.

Under this plan, 35 districts are created where Obama had at least 62% of the vote and McCain had at most 36%.  Another 6 districts are ones which are 61-37, 61-38 or 60-38 Obama-McCain.  (All 41 of the districts mentioned went for John Kerry in 2004; including 34 where Bush had 45% of the vote or less in 2004.)  1 district was won by Obama 52-46.  The remaining 11 districts were all won by McCain (and in all 11 districts Bush received 60% or more of the vote in 2004).

In a “neutral” political climate, this plan should result in a net gain of 7 seats for the Democrats (Districts 3, 24, 25, 26, 45, 46, 50).  One additional seat, District 48, might prove to be competitive in the future.  Additionally, this map strengthens several Democratic-held districts, most notably District 11.

Under the new map, 4 new Hispanic-majority seats are created (Districts 16, 25, 26, 46) although it’s really only a net gain of 3 as CA-32 is turned from majority Hispanic to plurality Asian.  Additionally, the new CA-45 becomes 49% Hispanic and may become Hispanic-majority in the future, although in many parts of California, a district needs to be around 60% or more Hispanic to ensure representation.  All-in-all, 21 of 53 districts under the new plan are either Hispanic majority or plurality (including several GOP seats, where many Hispanics are still unregistered or are ineligible because they are non-citizens).  Several existing Hispanic-majority seats (most notably CA-28 and CA-51) become even more Hispanic, where the incumbents there may face a challenge in the Democratic primary.

Districts 15 and 32 become plurality Asian districts.  (Btw, the demographic stats below include percentages for groups that total 10% or more of the population of a particular district).

MAPS:

District 1:

Incumbent: Mike Thompson

Current District:  Obama 66; McCain 32

Proposed District:  Obama 64; McCain 34 (Kerry 58; Bush 41)

Demographics: white 68; hispanic 21

TTP: 34

This district combines parts of the current CA-1 (Napa and Lake Counties and parts of Sonoma Co. — Sonoma, Healdsburg) with added parts of Sonoma Co. (Santa Rosa, Rohnert Park, Cotati, Sebastopol), and parts of the central valley (including Chico and most of Butte Co.).  The new district is a bit less Democratic than the current one, but should still be very safe for blue dog Thompson (though he’s really not as conservative as other blue dogs).  Even though only about 34% of the new district’s territory is currently part of CA-1, another 35% is taken out of areas in Sonoma Co. currently in CA-6 which are even more progressive.  The remainder is in the central valley, but Thompson’s involvement with agricultural issues should be an added bonus in the rural areas of the district.

District 2:  

Incumbent: Wally Herger

Current District:  Obama 43; McCain 55

Proposed District:  Obama 39; McCain 59 (Kerry 33; Bush 66)

Demographics: white 72; hispanic 16

TTP: 69

Combines the most Republican parts of northern California into one district – all of Siskiyou, Modoc, Lassen, Shasta, Tehama, Plumas, Sierra, Yuba and Sutter Counties, as well as most of Colusa, small parts of Butte, and some of the most Republican parts of Placer.  District becomes even more Republican than the current CA-2.

District 3:  

Incumbent: Dan Lungren

Current District:  Obama 49; McCain 49

Proposed District:  Obama 61; McCain 37 (Kerry 52; Bush 47)

Demographics: white 42; hispanic 23; asian 18; black 10

TTP: 17

The new district combines all of progressive Yolo County with purple to blue-leaning parts of Sacramento Co.; the district stays in the same general area but over 80% of the territory here is new.  A Democrat should do well running here.  In 2008 Lungren only won the current CA-3 by a 49.5 to 44 margin.  Democratic Gain !

District 4:  

Incumbent: Tom McClintock

Current District:  Obama 44; McCain 54

Proposed District:  Obama 45; McCain 53 (Kerry 39; Bush 60)

Demographics: white 80; hispanic 11

TTP: 75

The new CA-4 includes all of Nevada, El Dorado, Amador, Calaveras, Alpine and Mono Counties, as well as parts of Placer and Sacramento Counties.  Charlie Brown might have won last year by a sliver under the new lines (he only lost to McClintock by 0.5 point) but the new district is nevertheless a Republican one.

District 5:  

Incumbent: Doris Matsui

Current District:  Obama 70; McCain 28

Proposed District:  Obama 64; McCain 34 (Kerry 55; Bush 44)

Demographics: white 57; hispanic 19; asian 10

TTP: 55

The new district combines most of the city of Sacramento with GOP-leaning suburbs in Sacramento Co.  The Democratic percentage goes down around 6 points, but the district remains safely Democratic.

District 6:

Incumbent: Lynn Woolsey

Current District:  Obama 76; McCain 22

Proposed District:  Obama 72; McCain 26 (Kerry 66; Bush 33)

Demographics: white 74; hispanic 15

TTP: 58

The new CA-6 includes Woolsey’s current territory — all of Marin and parts of Sonoma Counties.  Additional parts of the north coast are attached — all of Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino and Trinity Counties, as well as a part of northern Sonoma around Cloverdale.  The Democratic margin goes down a bit, but the progressive Woolsey should feel right at home in her new 72% Obama district that stretches along the entire length of the north coast from the Golden Gate to the Oregon border.

District 7:  

Incumbent: George Miller

Current District:  Obama 72; McCain 27

Proposed District:  Obama 66; McCain 33 (Kerry 61; Bush 38)

Demographics: white 43; hispanic 23; asian 15; black 12

TTP: 79

The boundaries of the new CA-7 adhere pretty closely to those of the current district.  The lines include most of Solano County as well as parts of Contra Costa Co. — Martinez,  Pinole, Hercules, San Pablo, Clayton and part of Concord.  The Democratic percentage goes down by about 6 points, as the district loses Richmond and expands more into Solano, but the district remains solidly Democratic.

District 8:  

Incumbent: Nancy Pelosi

Current District:  Obama 85; McCain 12

Proposed District:  Obama 85; McCain 13 (Kerry 85; Bush 14)

Demographics: white 44; asian 30; hispanic 15

TTP: 96

The San Francisco based CA-8 changes ever so slightly, as areas in the Sunset district are added to maintain equal population.

District 9:  

Incumbent: Barbara Lee

Current District:  Obama 88; McCain 10

Proposed District:  Obama 76; McCain 22 (Kerry 73; Bush 25)

Demographics: white 43; hispanic 20; black 17; asian 15

TTP: 56

Combines ultra-progressive areas in Oakland, Berkeley, Albany and Emeryville with more conservative (relatively speaking) areas in Contra Costa County (Moraga, Orinda, Lafayette, Walnut Creek, Danville, San Ramon, Brentwood), as well as Livermore in eastern Alameda Co.  Most African-American areas in Oakland remain in CA-9, even though other parts of Oakland are lost to the new CA-11.  The Democratic percentage goes down a lot, but as it started at 88% Obama, it can afford to fall a lot and still leave this a very solidly Democratic district.

District 10:  

Incumbent: John Garamendi

Current District:  Obama 65; McCain 33

Proposed District:  Obama 66; McCain 32 (Kerry 60; Bush 39)

Demographics: white 48; hispanic 26; asian 11; black 10

TTP: 51

The new district is largely similar to the current one. Like the current district, it includes communities in Contra Costa, Solano and Sacramento Counties (some, such as Richmond in Contra Costa, have been added).  Livermore in Alameda Co. is taken out and is substituted by the addition of Lodi in San Joaquin Co.  Overall, the Democratic percentage goes up slightly.

District 11:  

Incumbent: Jerry McNerney

Current District:  Obama 54; McCain 44

Proposed District:  Obama 61; McCain 37 (Kerry 52; Bush 47)

Demographics: white 57; hispanic 21; asian 11

TTP: 34

Much of the district remains the same. Some light-blue to purple areas in Contra Costa, San Joaquin and Santa Clara Counties are detached while the district expands into parts of Oakland (blue as can be) and Stanislaus Co (purple).  The expansion into Oakland alone makes the Democratic percentage go up enough to make this a safer Democratic district.  Even though only about 34% of the new district’s territory is currently part of CA-11, another 31% comes out of Oakland and other progressive areas currently in CA-9 (the expansion into Oakland doesn’t hurt CA-9 at all).  

District 12:  

Incumbent: Jackie Speier

Current District:  Obama 74; McCain 24

Proposed District:  Obama 74; McCain 24 (Kerry 72; Bush 27)

Demographics: white 44; asian 30; hispanic 20

TTP: 91

The new district remains very similar to the current one.  Boundaries in San Francisco shift a bit, while in San Mateo Co., a part of Redwood City is added, so that now all of it is in CA-12.

District 13:

Incumbent: Pete Stark

Current District:  Obama 74; McCain 24

Proposed District:  Obama 74; McCain 24 (Kerry 71; Bush 28)

Demographics: asian 33; white 32; hispanic 24

TTP: 94

The new district is very similar to the current one.  It includes Fremont, Newark, Union City, Hayward, San Leandro and Alameda, and remains plurality Asian.

District 14:  

Incumbent: Anna Eshoo

Current District:  Obama 73; McCain 25

Proposed District:  Obama 72; McCain 26 (Kerry 67; Bush 31)

Demographics: white 59; asian 19; hispanic 15

TTP: 59

This is another Bay Area district that stays demographically similar to the current seat under this plan.  The district continues to closely overlap with Silicon Valley; it loses parts of Sunnyvale to the new CA-15 and Santa Cruz Co. areas to CA-17, but expands into new territory in Santa Clara Co. (Campbell, Los Gatos and parts of San Jose).

District 15:  

Incumbent: Mike Honda

Current District:  Obama 68; McCain 30

Proposed District:  Obama 68; McCain 30 (Kerry 63; Bush 36)

Demographics: asian 43; white 33; hispanic 18

TTP: 63

New district is centered on San Jose; though the boundaries change somewhat.  The district becomes plurality Asian, though it should be noted that the “Asian” population here includes persons from East Asia, South Asia and parts of the Middle East.

District 16:  

Incumbent: Zoe Lofgren

Current District:  Obama 70; McCain 29

Proposed District:  Obama 63; McCain 35 (Kerry 57; Bush 42)

Demographics: hispanic 51; white 25; asian 18

TTP: 58

The new CA-16 combines the San Jose core of the current district with more conservative areas in the central valley.  The Democratic percentage goes down somewhat, but it remains a safely Democratic seat.  The district becomes majority Hispanic, but only by a bare majority.  Lofgren should have no trouble winning here as long as she wants to run, but if she decides to retire the seat may elect a Hispanic representative.

District 17:

Incumbent: Sam Farr

Current District:  Obama 72; McCain 26

Proposed District:  Obama 63; McCain 35 (Kerry 57; Bush 42)

Demographics: white 62; hispanic 26

TTP: 50

The new district includes all of Santa Cruz County, coastal areas of Monterey County, interior areas of San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties, as well as portions of southern Santa Clara County (Morgan Hill and parts of San Jose).  It remains safely Democratic.

District 18:  

Incumbent: Dennis Cardoza

Current District:  Obama 59; McCain 39

Proposed District:  Obama 60; McCain 38 (Kerry 50; Bush 49)

Demographics: hispanic 44; white 30; asian 14

TTP: 68

CA-18 remains similar to the current district in many respects, though it doesn’t look quite the same on a map.  Stockton and other areas in San Joaquin Co., parts of Modesto, and areas in Merced Co., which is Cardoza’s home area, form much of the district.  It remains plurality Hispanic.  The partisan breakdown inches up in the Democrat’s direction.  Blue dog Cardoza should have no trouble winning here.

District 19:  

Incumbent: George Radanovich

Current District:  Obama 46; McCain 52

Proposed District:  Obama 41; McCain 57 (Kerry 34; Bush 65)

Demographics: white 56; hispanic 33

TTP: 39

The new district becomes more Republican than the current one, as areas in Fresno County are shifted around; the goal is to make the neighboring CA-20 a bit more Democratic, as well as create a new Hispanic-majority, Democratic district next door (the new CA-25).  The new 19th includes all of Tuolumne and Mariposa Counties, most of Madera Co., and parts of Fresno, Kings and Tulare Counties.

District 20:  

Incumbent: Jim Costa

Current District:  Obama 60; McCain 39

Proposed District:  Obama 61; McCain 37 (Kerry 52; Bush 47)

Demographics: hispanic 69; white 16

TTP: 98

The district remains very similar to the current one, with a few areas shifted around to make it marginally more Democratic.  The district continues to include parts of the cities of Fresno and Bakersfield, as well as more rural areas in between.  (My “TTP” here, 98, may seem off, as the district doesn’t look exactly like the old one.  Some populated areas in northern Kings Co. have indeed been taken out, but as the TTP is a measure of what percentage of the NEW district was formerly a part of the old, any areas taken OUT would have no effect on the measure as they are no longer a part of the NEW district.)

District 21:  

Incumbent: Devin Nunes

Current District:  Obama 42; McCain 56

Proposed District:  Obama 47; McCain 51 (Kerry 37; Bush 62)

Demographics: hispanic 45; white 41

TTP: 40

The new district continues to include much of Tulare County, but also expands into new territory — parts of what is currently CA-25 (Inyo Co. and western portions of San Bernardino Co.).   The new partisan numbers may appear competitive (and the district is plurality Hispanic), but it should be noted that the new district had one of the highest Democratic jumps between 2004 and 2008 (and much of the Hispanic population here is undocumented or unregistered).  Fundamentally, this still remains a very Republican district; the future may hold a different scenario (?).

District 22:  

Incumbent: Kevin McCarthy

Current District:  Obama 38; McCain 60

Proposed District:  Obama 38; McCain 60 (Kerry 30; Bush 69)

Demographics: white 57; hispanic 28

TTP: 83

In most ways, the new CA-22 remains geographically and politically similar to the current district.  The San Luis Obispo Co. interior areas are detached.  The new CA-22 is politically the most conservative in California.

District 23:  

Incumbent: Lois Capps

Current District:  Obama 66; McCain 32

Proposed District:  Obama 66; McCain 32 (Kerry 58; Bush 40)

Demographics: hispanic 46; white 44

TTP: 98

The new district is almost identical to the current one, following the coast from Oxnard through Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties.

District 24:  

Incumbent: Elton Gallegly

Current District:  Obama 51; McCain 48

Proposed District:  Obama 62; McCain 36 (Kerry 55; Bush 44)

Demographics: white 68; hispanic 19

TTP: 56

The new district combines much of Ventura Co. with parts of Los Angeles Co. (Malibu, Santa Monica, Calabassas, Hidden Hills, Agoura Hills, Westlake Village and parts of the city of Los Angeles).  The new lines and partisan numbers don’t look great for Gallegly.  He won with 58% last year against token opposition in a district that is much more Republican and his Simi Valley home is cut out of the district under this plan.  It should also be noted that Gallegly almost retired in 2006.  This all leads to a likely Democratic Gain !

District 25:  

Incumbent: none (district completely relocated)

Current District:  Obama 49; McCain 48 (but not really applicable as district relocated from southern California where it is a GOP district)

Proposed District:  Obama 61; McCain 38 (Kerry 51; Bush 47)

Demographics: hispanic 60; white 27

TTP: 0

CA-25 is a new Hispanic-majority district (at 60% of the population) encompassing much of interior Monterey County (including Salinas), all of San Benito Co. and areas of Madera, Fresno and Santa Clara Counties.  This is a major agricultural area; it is designed to elect a Hispanic-American Democratic Rep.  Democratic Gain !

District 26:  

Incumbent: David Dreier

Current District:  Obama 51; McCain 47

Proposed District:  Obama 63; McCain 35 (Kerry 56; Bush 43)

Demographics: hispanic 61; white 22; asian 12

TTP: 18

This new district encompasses only a few of the areas currently in CA-26 — San Dimas, La Verne and Claremont.  It also includes El Monte, South El Monte, Irwindale, Baldwin Park, La Puente, Covina, West Covina and Azusa.  The district becomes Hispanic majority, and a solid majority one at that.  Last year Dreier had 53% to 40% for the Democrat and 7% for a Libertarian candidate.  Good luck to Dreier if he seeks re-election here.  Very likely, a Democratic Gain !

District 27:  

Incumbents: Brad Sherman; Howard McKeon

Current District:  Obama 66; McCain 32 (Obama 49-McCain 48 in McKeon’s CA-25, which is relocated to central California)

Proposed District:  Obama 64; McCain 34 (Kerry 57; Bush 41)

Demographics: white 52; hispanic 31

TTP: 33

The bulk of this district is made up of communities within the city of Los Angeles (North Hollywood, San Fernando valley neighborhoods, etc.).  Also attached is Santa Clarita to the north.  The new district is safely Democratic.  Even though only about 33% of the new district’s territory is currently part of CA-27, another 42% comes out of what is now CA-28, which is an even more progressive area.  The remainder is Santa Clarita and vicinity (McKeon’s CA-25).

District 28:  

Incumbent: Howard Berman

Current District:  Obama 76; McCain 22

Proposed District:  Obama 66; McCain 32 (Kerry 59; Bush 40)

Demographics: hispanic 64; white 22

TTP: 52

This district becomes even more Hispanic than the current version.  The new lines include a good part of the San Fernando Valley as well as Palmdale in northern LA County.  The district becomes less Democratic, but the only upset here could occur in the Democratic primary if a Hispanic-American candidate makes a run for the seat.  Perhaps Berman would decide to run in a primary against Brad Sherman under this map, as over 40% of Sherman’s new district includes territory currently a part of CA-28.

District 29:  

Incumbent: Adam Schiff

Current District:  Obama 68; McCain 30

Proposed District:  Obama 63; McCain 35 (Kerry 56; Bush 42)

Demographics: white 49; hispanic 25; asian 15

TTP: 61

The new CA-29 includes most of Schiff’s current territory in Pasadena, Glendale and Burbank.  Areas to the east are added (Sierra Madre, Arcadia, Monrovia, Bradbury, Glendora, La Canada-Flintridge) — mostly from the current CA-26.  The Democratic margin goes down somewhat, but this is still a safely Democratic seat.

District 30:  

Incumbent: Henry Waxman

Current District:  Obama 70; McCain 28

Proposed District:  Obama 65; McCain 33 (Kerry 60; Bush 39)

Demographics: white 63; hispanic 20; asian 10

TTP: 46

This westside LA district includes communities currently in CA-30 (Beverly Hills, West Hollywood and various parts of Los Angeles) as well as newly attached areas in Los Angeles (San Fernando Valley) and in Ventura Co. (Simi Valley, Moorpark).  Santa Monica, Malibu and a few other areas are taken out and attached to the neighboring CA-24.  The district remains a Democratic bastion, and a quite progressive one at that (and yes, the Reagan Library and West Hollywood are now in the same district !)

District 31:  

Incumbent: Xavier Beccera

Current District:  Obama 80; McCain 18

Proposed District:  Obama 80; McCain 18 (Kerry 77; Bush 22)

Demographics: hispanic 64; white 15; asian 14

TTP: 76

This central Los Angeles district shifts westward a bit, but for the most part (including partisan demographics) remains as is.

District 32:  

Incumbent: Judy Chu

Current District:  Obama 68; McCain 30

Proposed District:  Obama 62; McCain 36 (Kerry 56; Bush 43)

Demographics: asian 42; hispanic 37; white 16

TTP: 28

The new CA-32 runs from a part of East Los Angeles through Monterey Park, Alhambra, South Pasadena, San Marino, Temple City, San Gabriel, Rosemead, Walnut, Diamond Bar and areas in between.  The district becomes plurality Asian.  Many Hispanic-majority areas of the current CA-32 are detached in order to create the new Hispanic-majority CA-26 just to the north and east of the new CA-32.

District 33:  

Incumbent: Diane Watson

Current District:  Obama 87; McCain 12

Proposed District:  Obama 88; McCain 11 (Kerry 84; Bush 15)

Demographics: hispanic 46; black 29; white 12

TTP: 70

The new CA-33 expands somewhat into south central LA to keep the black percentage as high as possible here, although as south central is rapidly becoming majority Hispanic, the resulting district is only 29% black.  Also added is the Westchester area around LAX., while the Silver Lake/Griffith Park area is taken out of the district.

District 34:  

Incumbent: Lucille Roybal-Allard

Current District:  Obama 75; McCain 23

Proposed District:  Obama 76; McCain 22 (Kerry 70; Bush 29)

Demographics: hispanic 77; white 10

TTP: 76

The new district is very similar to the current one, including downtown Los Angeles, Downey, and everything in between, as well as new territory north of downtown.  Bellflower is detached from the district.

District 35:  

Incumbent: Maxine Waters

Current District:  Obama 84; McCain 14

Proposed District:  Obama 73; McCain 25 (Kerry 68; Bush 31)

Demographics: hispanic 45; black 28; white 15

TTP: 36

There’s only one way the new district here could have been drawn !  Yes … the heart of south central LA/Watts and Inglewood are combined with the Palos Verdes peninsula.  Also included are Carson, the Wilmington and San Pedro areas of LA, and Avalon on Santa Catalina Island.  Even though only about 36% of the new district’s territory is currently part of CA-35, another 26% is taken out of areas currently in the districts of African-American Representatives Diane Watson and Laura Richardson.  The Democratic percentage falls by over 10 points, but Waters should still be very safe in the resulting 73% Obama district.

District 36:  

Incumbent: Jane Harman

Current District:  Obama 64; McCain 34

Proposed District:  Obama 64; McCain 34 (Kerry 59; Bush 40)

Demographics: white 42; hispanic 30; asian 17

TTP: 69

The new CA-36 is similar to the current district hugging Santa Monica Bay. Some communities are detached (Wilmington and San Pedro areas of LA.) while others are attached (Hawthorne, Lawndale, Gardena), but the partisan demographics remain the same.

District 37:  

Incumbents: Laura Richardson; Dana Rohrabacher

Current District:  Obama 80; McCain 19 (Obama 48-McCain 50 in Rohrabacher’s CA-46, which is relocated to the inland empire area)

Proposed District:  Obama 65; McCain 33 (Kerry 59; Bush 39)

Demographics: hispanic 38; white 33; black 14; asian 11

TTP: 67

The new district includes most of Long Beach and Huntington Beach, as well as all of Seal Beach and Compton.  About 67% of the new district’s territory comes out of the current CA-37, while about 33% comes out of the current CA-46.  I know that Richardson is not the best California Democratic Rep, but even she should be safe in this seat (any semi-competent Democrat should be OK here.)  Ideally, a better Democrat wins here in a primary.  In the meantime, Rohrabacher can go back to concentrate on his surfing.

District 38:  

Incumbent: Grace Napolitano

Current District:  Obama 71; McCain 27

Proposed District:  Obama 63; McCain 35 (Kerry 57; Bush 42)

Demographics: hispanic 65; white 22

TTP: 47

This remains a majority-Hispanic district encompassing areas like Norwalk, Bellflower, Artesia, Santa Fe Springs, Pico Rivera, Montebello, Whittier and a part of East LA — all in Los Angeles County, as well as La Habra and parts of Fullerton and Placentia in Orange County.  Even though only 47% of the new district’s territory comes out of the current CA-38, another 28% comes out of neighboring Democratic-held seats, CA-34 and CA-39; the remaining 25% comes out of currently GOP-held seats.

District 39:  

Incumbent: Linda Sánchez

Current District:  Obama 65; McCain 32

Proposed District:  Obama 66; McCain 32 (Kerry 59; Bush 40)

Demographics: hispanic 61; white 20; asian 10

TTP: 82

The new district is very similar to the current one, including parts of LA County — South Gate, Lynwood, Paramount, Lakewood, Hawaiian Gardens, Cerritos, La Mirada and a part of Long Beach.

District 40:  

Incumbent: Ed Royce

Current District:  Obama 47; McCain 51

Proposed District:  Obama 46; McCain 52 (Kerry 38; Bush 61)

Demographics: white 45; asian 26; hispanic 23

TTP: 57

The Orange Co.-based district is somewhat similar to the current one, but becomes slightly more Republican, as communities are shifted around.  Placentia, Orange, Villa Park and a part of Fullerton are detached, while Fountain Valley, Newport Beach and parts of Westminster, Huntington Beach and Garden Grove are added.

District 41:  

Incumbent: Jerry Lewis

Current District:  Obama 44; McCain 54

Proposed District:  Obama 44; McCain 54 (Kerry 37; Bush 62)

Demographics: white 59; hispanic 29

TTP: 69

This district includes much of central and eastern San Bernardino County, as well as parts of Riverside Co. (Banning, Beaumont, Calimesa, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, La Quinta and Blythe.)

District 42:  

Incumbent: Gary Miller

Current District:  Obama 45; McCain 53

Proposed District:  Obama 42; McCain 56 (Kerry 34; Bush 65)

Demographics: white 60; hispanic 22; asian 12

TTP: 56

This is the “stereotypical” Orange County of Richard Nixon.  The district runs from his birthplace in Yorba Linda to his “summer White House” in San Clemente.  Also included are Brea, Orange, Villa Park, Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, parts of Placentia, Anaheim and San Juan Capistrano, as well as the Chino Hills part of San Bernardino Co. The new district becomes even more Republican than the current one.

District 43:  

Incumbent: Joe Baca

Current District:  Obama 68; McCain 30

Proposed District:  Obama 66; McCain 32 (Kerry 56; Bush 43)

Demographics: hispanic 60; white 20; black 12

TTP: 82

The new CA-43 inlcudes many of the same areas as the current district — the city of San Bernardino, Colton, Rialto and Fontana — as well as added areas, parts of Redlands and Highland.  The new district remains majority-Hispanic.

District 44:  

Incumbent: Ken Calvert

Current District:  Obama 50; McCain 49

Proposed District:  Obama 46; McCain 52 (Kerry 36; Bush 62)

Demographics: white 52; hispanic 34

TTP: 56

The new CA-44 is completely confined to Riverside County, and includes communities like Corona, Norco, Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake and Hemet.  I’ve made the adjoining CA-45 much more Democratic, so this district has to become more Republican to balance the numbers.  I hate to leave Calvert in place, but the way the new CA-45 looks, it’s quite likely that Mary Bono could choose to run here instead.  In fact, she already represents almost a quarter of the new district’s population, and it would make more sense for her to run here and challenge the ethically-challenged Calvert in a primary, rather than run in the much more Democratic new CA-45 next door.

District 45:  

Incumbent: Mary Bono Mack

Current District:  Obama 52; McCain 47

Proposed District:  Obama 62; McCain 36 (Kerry 53; Bush 45)

Demographics: hispanic 49; white 31; black 10

TTP: 42

The new lines here maintain the district wholly within Riverside County.  Only the most Democratic areas are included – including Moreno Valley, Perris, Cathedral City, Palm Springs and much of Riverside.  Bono Mack lives in Palm Springs, and she won last time with 58% of the vote against a weak opponent.  It would make much more sense for her to run in CA-44 next door, or even in the new CA-41 which now expands into Riverside Co. areas just east of Palm Springs.  Both CA-41 and CA-44 GOP incumbents are ethically challenged and Bono currently represents good parts of those districts.   She would have a very hard to win race here.  If a credible Democrat runs in this 53 Kerry-45 Bush district, it is likely to be a Democratic Gain !

District 46:  

Incumbent: none (district completely relocated)

Current District:  Obama 48; McCain 50 (but not really applicable as district relocated from coastal Orange and LA Counties where it is a GOP district)

Proposed District:  Obama 64; McCain 34 (Kerry 54; Bush 45)

Demographics: hispanic 64; white 22

TTP: 0

California’s “Inland Empire” has had some of the state’s highest growth rate of the last decade, fueled largely by an increase in the Hispanic population.  The new CA-46 reflects that growth through the creation of a new Hispanic-majority district here. The new district includes the unincorporated extreme northwestern part of Riverside County as well as areas in San Bernardino Co. (Ontario, Montclair, Chino and parts of Rancho Cucamonga and Fontana), as well as most of Pomona in LA County.  Democratic Gain !

District 47:  

Incumbent: Loretta Sanchez

Current District:  Obama 60; McCain 38

Proposed District:  Obama 61; McCain 37 (Kerry 50; Bush 49)

Demographics: hispanic 68; white 15; asian 13

TTP: 97

The new CA-47 is very similar to the current district.  A few more Democratic precincts in Santa Ana are added, while more GOP parts of Garden Grove are detached, making the new district a tad more Democratic.  Parts of Anaheim and Fullerton are also in the district.  The Asian percentage goes down by a few points, as some of the Garden Grove areas are detached.

District 48:  

Incumbent: John Campbell

Current District:  Obama 49; McCain 49

Proposed District:  Obama 52; McCain 46 (Kerry 43; Bush 56)

Demographics: white 57; hispanic 21; asian 16

TTP: 78

The major change here is that Republican Newport Beach and North Tustin/Tustin Foothills are detached, while Democratic Costa Mesa is attached.  Irvine, Aliso Viejo, Dana Point, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Laguna Woods, Laguna Hills, Tustin and Lake Forest remain in the district.  The Democratic numbers go up, but probably not enough to initially make a dramatic difference.  However, with changing demographics and the right candidate we may be able to flip this seat in the future.  Coastal areas in California are becoming more and more Democratic over time.  This district is one that is already not very conservative on social issues (a majority here voted against Proposition 4 last year — a measure advocating parental notification before a minor’s abortion, and the electorate just barely voted yes on Prop. 8 — as opposed to other GOP areas in California where Prop. 8 had big majorities).  A hard-core conservative (ie., “birther” John Campbell) may not be able to hold such a district forever.

District 49:  

Incumbent: Darrell Issa

Current District:  Obama 45; McCain 53

Proposed District:  Obama 49; McCain 50 (Kerry 39; Bush 60)

Demographics: white 55; hispanic 31

TTP: 41

The new CA-49 includes parts of San Diego County — Oceanside, Carlsbad, Vista, San Marcos, Escondido, Rancho Santa Fe and parts of the city of San Diego (areas like Rancho Penasquitos and Rancho Bernardo).  Only 41% of the new district is territory that is currently in CA-49, while 51% comes out of what is now CA-50 — including Brian Bilbray’s home in Carlsbad.  The creation of this district could produce an interesting GOP primary between Issa and Bilbray.  The new district remains fairly Republican (despite Obama coming within less than 3,000 votes of winning it).

District 50:  

Incumbent: Brian Bilbray

Current District:  Obama 51; McCain 47

Proposed District:  Obama 62; McCain 36 (Kerry 54; Bush 45)

Demographics: white 61; hispanic 17; asian 14

TTP: 42

CA-50 shifts southward under this plan. The new district combines much of the northern parts of the city of San Diego — including La Jolla, Clairemont, Pacific Beach, Mission Hills, Mission Valley, Serra Mesa, Hillcrest, University Heights, Normal Heights, North Park and college areas around UCSD and  SDSU (a number of these neighborhoods are added from CA-53), as well as the incorporated communities of Del Mar, Solana Beach and Encinitas.  The Democratic percentage goes up significantly.  Bilbray (whose home is no longer in the district under the new lines) beat Nick Leibham here last year by 5 points, while in the 2006 special election, Bilbray beat Francine Busby by 4.5 points.  The new CA-50 has a Democratic margin that’s many points higher than the old CA-50; you can do the math.  Democratic Gain !

District 51:  

Incumbent: Bob Filner

Current District:  Obama 63; McCain 35

Proposed District:  Obama 63; McCain 36 (Kerry 53; Bush 46)

Demographics: hispanic 69; white 17

TTP: 79

The new district remains very similar to the current one.  The only major changes are that a part of San Diego as well as unincorporated communities to the north of Chula Vista are detached while Democratic parts of Riverside Co. (Coachella, Indio) are added.  The district remains majority Hispanic.

District 52:  

Incumbent: Duncan Hunter

Current District:  Obama 45; McCain 53

Proposed District:  Obama 39; McCain 59 (Kerry 32; Bush 67)

Demographics: white 68; hispanic 20

TTP: 52

This district becomes considerably more Republican as areas in and around the city of San Diego are detached while more GOP areas in northern San Diego County and southwestern Riverside Co. (Temecula, Murrieta) are added.  Only a little over half of the new district’s territory comes out of the current CA-52; much of the remainder is currently a part of CA-49.

District 53:  

Incumbent: Susan Davis

Current District:  Obama 68; McCain 30

Proposed District:  Obama 66; McCain 32 (Kerry 59; Bush 40)

Demographics: hispanic 37; white 36; asian 12; black 10

TTP: 57

The new CA-53 is anchored by the city of San Diego, with smaller communities like Imperial Beach, Coronado, Lemon Grove, La Mesa and part of El Cajon also included.  The new district includes San Diego neighborhoods like Mission Beach, Mission Bay, Ocean Beach, Point Loma/Harbor, Old Town, Downtown, City Heights and now virtually all of Southeast San Diego.  The district is slightly less Democratic than the current one, but remains solid for us.

So that’s my revised plan for California.  I welcome comments and suggestions.

By: Inoljt, http://thepolitikalblog.wordpr…

Last night’s election exhibited two trends: one positive for the country as a whole, and one more ominous for Democrats. Firstly, Americans rejected negative campaigning and extremism – whether it be in Virginia, New Jersey, NY-23, or Maine. Secondly, the electorate as a whole shifted quite profoundly to the right.



Negative Campaigning and Extremism

In the most-watched races, voters chose the side that espoused moderation and ran a positive message. The Democratic candidates in both Virginia and New Jersey focused on the negative: state congressman Creigh Deeds of Virginia spent most of his time attacking Attorney General Bob McDonnell’s college thesis, while Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey launched a barrage of negative ads. Both candidates lost.

The other races featured the victory of moderate politics over extremism. In NY-23,  a Republican-represented district since the Civil War, conservatives sabotaged the moderate Republican candidate in favor of hard-line Doug Hoffman. Fortunately, voters in upstate New York rejected the Glenn Beck nominee and instead chose Democrat Bill Owens, an independent turned Democrat.

Thus the election results enforced a positive trend in politics – one of moderation and positive campaigning focused on the issues, rather than divisive personal attacks. For Democrats like myself, however, the other trend – a rightward shift – is more worrisome.

A Rightward Shift

For Democrats, the election’s most worrying result was not in Virginia, New Jersey, or Maine. It was the special election in CA-10.

At first glance, this might seem a bit puzzling. Democrats won that election, after all – and they won it by a comfortable 10% margin.

Yet, when compared to previous elections, this result is quite an underperformance. Barack Obama, for instance, won this congressional district by three times that margin. Since 2002, moreover, former Democratic congressman Ellen Tauscher had never polled below 65% of the vote.

Moreover, the election revealed more about the national mood than, say, Virginia or New Jersey. Those races were heavily dependent on local factors (e.g. the quality of the Deeds campaign, the unpopularity of Governor Jon Corzine). In CA-10, you had two low-recognition candidates and little publicity; it was closer to a generic ballot poll.

If  CA-10 could be characterized as a generic ballot poll, then Democrats should be extremely worried. In 2009, CA-10 went from a 30% Democratic victory to a 10% one: a 10-point shift to the right. Similar shifts were seen in New Jersey and Virginia; the electorate as a whole moved substantially to the right. The Democrats were very fortunate that Tuesday did not constitute a full-blown congressional election; they would have been crushed.

There is good news, however. Democratic weakness two days ago resulted more from an energized Republican base than a fundamental shift in the national mood. Republicans, motivated and unhappy, turned out; President Barack Obama’s coalition did not. The president still attains approval ratings in the low 50s – hardly the sign of an unpopular incumbent.

The bad news is that I am not sure if Mr. Obama’s coalition will turn out for the 2010 congressional elections. His voters have been curiously lethargic ever since his election; their low turn-out was how Senator Saxy Chambliss in Georgia went from a 3% general victory to a 14% run-off victory. Republicans, then, may do well next year.

In fact, I am not even sure Mr. Obama’s coalition will re-emerge in 2012, when he goes up for re-election. The president, after all, ran on a campaign of hope, change, and idealism. The difficult compromises forced by governing have tainted this brand, and it will inevitably continue to be diluted over the next three years. Obama’s 2008 coalition may go down as unique in American history, much like former President Jimmy Carter’s coalition.

I hope it will not. There is that word again.

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

Statewide Map, Version 2

For comparison, here is Version 1:

Statewide Map, Version 1

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now, on to the substance:

Political Impact

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

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

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

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

Northern California

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

Northern California, Version 2 map

Districts Altered:

CA-2

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

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

CA-3

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

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

CA-4

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

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

CA-7

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

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

CA-10

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

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

Southern California

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

Southern California, Version 2 map

South-East LA & Orange County, Version 2 map

Districts Altered

CA-22

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

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

CA-29

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

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

CA-40

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

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

CA-41

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

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

CA-43

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

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

CA-44

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

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

CA-45

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

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

CA-37

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

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

CA-46

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

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

CA-48

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

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

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

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

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

Read on for a detailed analysis and breakdown:

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

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

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

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

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

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

The future political shape of California

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

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

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

Actual 2008 Vote

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

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

What if the 2008 Electorate looked like the population?

	% of Population	Obama	McCain	Effective Obama Support
White	42.0%	52.0%	46.0%	53.1%
African American	5.9%	94.0%	5.0%	94.9%
Latino	36.6%	74.0%	23.0%	76.3%
Asian	12.2%	64.0%	35.0%	64.6%
Other	3.3%	55.0%	41.0%	57.3%
Total				65.6%

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

What if the 2008 Electorate looked like the population?

	% of Population	Obama	McCain	Effective Obama Support
White	42.0%	45.0%	53.0%	45.9%
African American	5.9%	94.0%	5.0%	94.9%
Latino	36.6%	74.0%	23.0%	76.3%
Asian	12.2%	64.0%	35.0%	64.6%
Other	3.3%	55.0%	41.0%	57.3%
Total				62.6%

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

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

Political Impact

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

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

District Political Status

Dem	39
Lean Dem	5
Swing	5
GOP	4

Safe Democratic seats

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

Lean Democratic seats

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

Swing Seats

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

GOP Seats

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

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

The Voting Rights Act

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

VRA Status of New Districts

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

Increase Latino voting strength

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

Increase Asian American voting strength

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

Maintain African American voting strength

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

Breakdown of the Districts

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

District Summary

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

Northern California

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

Northern California

Sacramento Area

San Francisco Bay Area

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

Northern Bay Area

Southern Bay Area

Central California

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

Central Coast

Central Valley

LA Area

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

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

Southern California

Northern LA area

Southern LA area

Eastern LA area

San Diego

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

Breakdown of the Districts

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

CA-1

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

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

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

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

CA-2

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

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

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

CA-3

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

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

CA-4

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

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

CA-5

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

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

CA-6

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

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

CA-7

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

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

CA-8

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

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

CA-9

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

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

CA-10

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

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

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

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

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

CA-11

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

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

CA-12

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

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

CA-13

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

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

CA-14

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

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

CA-15

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

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

CA-16

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

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

CA-17

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

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

CA-18

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

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

CA-19

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

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

CA-20

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

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

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

CA-21

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

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

CA-22

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

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

CA-23

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

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

CA-24

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

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

CA-25

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

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

CA-26

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

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

CA-27

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

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

CA-28

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

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

CA-29

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

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

CA-30

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

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

CA-31

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

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

CA-32

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

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

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

CA-33

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

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

CA-34

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

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

CA-35

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

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

CA-36

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

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

CA-37

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

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

CA-38

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

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

CA-39

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

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

CA-40

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

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

CA-41

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

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

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

CA-42

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

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

CA-43

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

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

CA-44

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

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

CA-45

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

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

CA-46

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

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

CA-47

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

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

CA-48

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

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

CA-49

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

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

CA-50

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

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

CA-51

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

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

CA-52

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

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

CA-53

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

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

That’s all, folks!

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

Here are my SSP-style ratings for the California State Legislature in 2010. In the State Senate table, I listed all the districts, even-numbered, that are up, because there are only 20 of them, and as of now only 3 are somewhat competitive. In the State Assembly table, I listed only the districts that are or could be competitive since all 80 districts there are up. Open seats are in italics.

District details can be found at the 2010 California Race Tracker. Feel free to jump in and add any updates as you find them.

State Senate

Solid D	Likely D	Lean D	Toss-Up	Lean R	Likely R	Solid R
2 (Wiggins) 6 (Steinberg) 8 (Yee) 10 (Corbett) 20 (Yee) 22 (Cedillo) 24 (Romero) 26 (Price) 28 (Oropeza) 30 (R. Calderon) 32 (Negrete-McLeod) 40 (Ducheny)	16 (Florez)	34 (Correa)	12 (Denham)			4 (Aanestad) 14 (Cogdill) 18 (Ashburn) 36 (Hollingsworth) 38 (Wyland)

State Assembly

Likely D	Lean D	Toss-Up	Lean R	Likely R
31 (Arambula) 78 (Block)	15 (Buchanan) 80 (Perez)	5 (Niello) 10 (Huber) 30 (Gilmore) 36 (Knight)	26 (Berryhill) 33 (Blakeslee) 37 (A. Strickland) 63 (Emmerson) 65 (Cook) 68 (Tran) 72 (DuVall)	3 (Logue) 38 (Smyth) 59 (Adams) 64 (Nestande) 70 (DeVore) 74 (Garrick) 75 (Fletcher)

Below the flip are the Senate and Assembly districts’ Cook PVI’s, with the Board of Equalization and counties thrown in, just in case anyone is curious.

State Senate

District	Incumbent	PVI
SD-01	Cox	R+8.0
SD-02	Wiggins	D+15.4
SD-03	Leno	D+29.1
SD-04	Aanestad	R+10.1
SD-05	Wolk	D+7.4
SD-06	Steinberg	D+9.4
SD-07	DeSaulnier	D+13.2
SD-08	Yee	D+24.3
SD-09	Hancock	D+32.0
SD-10	Corbett	D+18.8
SD-11	Simitian	D+20.2
SD-12	Denham	D+2.3
SD-13	Alquist	D+19.2
SD-14	Cogdill	R+11.8
SD-15	Maldonado	D+5.2
SD-16	Florez	D+3.6
SD-17	Runner	R+6.0
SD-18	Ashburn	R+16.5
SD-19	T. Strickland	D+1.5
SD-20	Padilla	D+18.4
SD-21	Liu	D+15.6
SD-22	Cedillo	D+25.6
SD-23	Pavley	D+16.9
SD-24	Romero	D+16.4
SD-25	Wright	D+24.9
SD-26	Price	D+33.1
SD-27	A. Lowenthal	D+12.2
SD-28	Oropeza	D+13.8
SD-29	Huff	R+4.9
SD-30	R. Calderon	D+14.9
SD-31	Dutton	R+4.9
SD-32	Negrete-McLeod	D+13.1
SD-33	Walters	R+9.4
SD-34	Correa	D+1.5
SD-35	Harman	R+5.9
SD-36	Hollingsworth	R+12.4
SD-37	Benoit	R+4.9
SD-38	Wyland	R+6.2
SD-39	Kehoe	D+10.6
SD-40	Ducheny	D+6.9

State Assembly

District	Incumbent	PVI
AD-01	Chesbro	D+12.2
AD-02	Nielsen	R+14.9
AD-03	Logue	R+4.9
AD-04	Gaines	R+8.6
AD-05	Niello	R+4.0
AD-06	Huffman	D+23.0
AD-07	Evans	D+17.3
AD-08	Yamada	D+8.9
AD-09	Jones	D+19.1
AD-10	Huber	R+3.8
AD-11	Torlakson	D+16.4
AD-12	Ma	D+28.5
AD-13	Ammiano	D+36.0
AD-14	Skinner	D+31.6
AD-15	Buchanan	D+3.0
AD-16	Swanson	D+36.2
AD-17	Galgiani	D+4.0
AD-18	Hayashi	D+21.2
AD-19	Hill	D+20.5
AD-20	Torrico	D+17.5
AD-21	Ruskin	D+18.7
AD-22	Fong	D+19.1
AD-23	Coto	D+18.3
AD-24	Beall	D+14.5
AD-25	T. Berryhill	R+8.6
AD-26	B. Berryhill	R+4.5
AD-27	Monning	D+18.7
AD-28	Caballero	D+13.5
AD-29	Villines	R+10.2
AD-30	Gilmore	R+4.0
AD-31	Arambula	D+6.9
AD-32	Fuller	R+18.3
AD-33	Blakeslee	R+4.1
AD-34	Conway	R+13.7
AD-35	Nava	D+12.7
AD-36	Knight	R+6.6
AD-37	A. Strickland	R+3.1
AD-38	Smyth	R+3.0
AD-39	Fuentes	D+22.6
AD-40	Blumenfield	D+13.0
AD-41	Brownley	D+14.5
AD-42	Feuer	D+23.2
AD-43	Krekorian	D+16.5
AD-44	Portantino	D+13.4
AD-45	de León	D+29.0
AD-46	J. Pérez	D+31.7
AD-47	Bass	D+32.4
AD-48	Davis	D+37.0
AD-49	Eng	D+12.7
AD-50	De La Torre	D+23.2
AD-51	Bradford	D+27.9
AD-52	Hall	D+37.9
AD-53	Lieu	D+9.1
AD-54	B. Lowenthal	D+8.7
AD-55	Furutani	D+15.6
AD-56	Mendoza	D+8.0
AD-57	Hernandez	D+11.9
AD-58	C. Calderon	D+13.0
AD-59	Adams	R+7.1
AD-60	Hagman	R+8.3
AD-61	Torres	D+8.2
AD-62	Carter	D+16.0
AD-63	Emmerson	R+3.7
AD-64	Nestande	R+5.0
AD-65	Cook	R+7.4
AD-66	Jeffries	R+11.4
AD-67	Silva	R+7.2
AD-68	Tran	R+7.1
AD-69	Solorio	D+8.0
AD-70	DeVore	R+4.0
AD-71	Miller	R+10.9
AD-72	Vacant	R+7.2
AD-73	Harkey	R+7.8
AD-74	Garrick	R+4.3
AD-75	Fletcher	R+3.4
AD-76	Saldaña	D+12.3
AD-77	Anderson	R+11.4
AD-78	Block	D+5.1
AD-79	Salas	D+9.9
AD-80	M. Perez	D+5.1

Board of Equalization

District	Incumbent	PVI
BOE-01	Yee	D+19.1
BOE-02	Leonard	R+3.8
BOE-03	Steel	R+4.1
BOE-04	Shea	D+18.0

County	1996-2000	2000-2004	2004-2008
Alameda	D+18.8	D+24.0	D+26.3
Alpine	R+1.2	D+2.4	D+6.4
Amador	R+7.8	R+10.1	R+10.9
Butte	R+7.4	R+4.8	R+3.1
Calaveras	R+7.9	R+9.3	R+9.7
Colusa	R+15.3	R+16.8	R+14.4
Contra Costa	D+8.5	D+12.2	D+14.4
Del Norte	R+3.7	R+6.5	R+6.4
El Dorado	R+10.8	R+10.5	R+9.5
Fresno	R+6.0	R+6.0	R+4.8
Glenn	R+17.4	R+17.3	R+15.1
Humboldt	R+4.5	D+2.7	D+9.3
Imperial	D+5.6	D+4.6	D+6.7
Inyo	R+11.8	R+10.4	R+7.9
Kern	R+13.0	R+14.3	R+14.1
Kings	R+8.6	R+12.3	R+12.6
Lake	D+1.3	D+3.9	D+5.0
Lassen	R+2.8	R+7.0	R+20.1
Los Angeles	D+12.6	D+15.0	D+15.6
Madera	R+13.0	R+13.1	R+11.6
Marin	D+12.4	D+20.4	D+24.9
Mariposa	R+10.0	R+10.1	R+9.3
Mendocino	R+1.8	D+7.6	D+15.8
Merced	R+3.4	R+4.9	R+2.8
Modoc	R+18.4	R+23.1	R+21.8
Mono	R+5.0	R+1.9	D+1.8
Monterey	D+6.6	D+10.6	D+13.7
Napa	D+3.8	D+8.6	D+11.7
Nevada	R+2.9	R+4.8	R+2.1
Orange	R+9.5	R+8.5	R+6.8
Placer	R+11.7	R+11.7	R+10.4
Plumas	R+11.4	R+12.1	R+10.1
Riverside	R+4.2	R+5.3	R+4.9
Sacramento	D+0.7	D+1.1	D+3.3
San Benito	D+3.7	D+5.1	D+5.8
San Bernardino	R+2.8	R+2.7	R+2.7
San Diego	R+3.3	R+1.8	R+0.3
San Francisco	D+25.1	D+30.9	D+32.9
San Joaquin	R+2.0	R+1.8	R+0.6
San Luis Obispo	R+5.1	R+3.2	R+1.9
San Mateo	D+13.7	D+18.6	D+20.9
Santa Barbara	R+1.7	D+2.0	D+6.1
Santa Clara	D+10.0	D+14.0	D+16.1
Santa Cruz	D+10.2	D+18.9	D+24.6
Shasta	R+15.8	R+16.8	R+16.3
Sierra	R+13.2	R+14.5	R+13.0
Siskiyou	R+10.1	R+11.8	R+4.7
Solano	D+7.3	D+8.8	D+9.6
Sonoma	D+8.8	D+15.0	D+19.8
Stanislaus	R+3.9	R+6.2	R+5.6
Sutter	R+17.2	R+17.0	R+14.1
Tehama	R+12.7	R+15.7	R+15.3
Trinity	R+6.0	R+6.9	R+3.3
Tulare	R+12.8	R+13.9	R+13.3
Tuolumne	R+7.1	R+8.5	R+9.3
Ventura	R+2.7	R+0.4	D+0.8
Yolo	D+7.1	D+8.8	D+12.6
Yuba	R+12.0	R+14.7	R+13.4