Swing State Project

This is first in a series of diaries looking at redistricting in the Michigan State House. I’m not totally sure how many parts there will be yet. The current diary is focused on Wayne County, home of Detroit, and the county with the worst numerical net loss of population over the last ten years of any in the country — just short of a quarter million.

The upshot here is that Wayne County currently possesses 23 state house districts; with the population loss, it’s going to drop to 20. All three seats loss are Detroit-based.

Michigan has a 110-member state house. In 2010, the Republicans gained nineteen seats while losing none, to take control of the chamber by a 63-47 margin.

I haven’t done a full map yet, so I don’t know for sure where those seats are going, but I have to assume that the loss of three safe seats in Detroit is going to make the task of regaining the chamber even more difficult for the Democrats.

Maps and more after the jump.

Note: ideal district size is now 89,851 people. The allowed deviation is 5%, I believe, which translates to 4492 people.

Old Districts

Here’s an approximation of the current districts based solely or partially in Detroit in Dave’s App:

Notice how under-populated the Detroit-based districts are. HD-01 (Grosse Pointes) is majority white; HD-12 (Southern Detroit) is majority Hispanic (total population, just short on VAP); the rest are majority African American. HD-01 is the only competive district, going 54-46 Democratic in 2010. The rest are safely Democratic.

Here’s the approximation of the rest of the county’s districts:

I lightened the colors to make the locality boundaries stand out. This obscures, to my vision, one of the district boundaries. The boundary between HD-14 (Northern Downriver) and HD-22 (Romulus/Taylor) is the Taylor/Allen Park city line.

Surprisingly, to me, there are actually four districts that are overpopulated; three of which are outside the allowable deviation. HD-21 is going to have to be broken up — that’s a really significant positive deviation.

Republicans hold three of these seats: HD-19 (Livonia), HD-20 (Plymouth/Northville), and HD-23 (Southern townships). Of the remaining seats, only HD-21 is competitive. The Democrats held on in 2010 by 51%-49% – about 900 votes. All of these seats should be winnable by the right Democrat in the right environment — I’m pretty sure, for example, that Obama carried every Wayne County district. Also, I’m reasonably certain that HD-20 would have the most Republican PVI, and it was a 2010 pickup for them.

Collectively, the Wayne County districts are 246k underpopulated. The twelve Detroit-based districts account for all but .8k of that shortfall. (That is, the number of non-Detroit-based districts is the same. All of the districts lost in Wayne County will be Detroit-based.)

New Districts

Michigan redistricting standards encourage linedrawers to maintain the integrity of localities where possible. This is the arrangement that I came to while redistributing the eleven non-Detroit-based districts within the limits of that guideline, while trying to protect the three Republican incumbents.

HD-23 (Southern townships) and HD-13 (Southern Downriver) are the only truly clean districts, with Gibraltar having been swapped from the former to the latter.

HD-21 needs to be broken up. Plymouth, Plymouth Twp, Northville, Northville Twp, Canton and Wayne combine to within 4k of the ideal for two districts. A real Republican plan would take into account how best to split Canton to their advantage; my selection of precincts to end up in HD-20 and HD-21 was arbitrary. HD-21, however, should end up more Republican than before: Van Buren Twp and Belleville together are both more Democratic and larger than Wayne.

Livonia and Dearborn are each slightly too large to be single district. I maintained Livonia’s current donation to HD-17, Dearborn ends up donating into HD-14 (Northern Downriver) instead of into Detroit. This is because HD-14 was too large with River Rouge (which therefore ends up in a Detroit-based district) but worked with the donation from Dearborn.

With Van Buren/Belleville bounded on the north by HD-21 and on the south by HD-23, the only place for them to go was into HD-22 to the east. This required Romulus and Taylor to split. I ended up combining Romulus/Van Buren/Belleville with Inkster and enough of Westland to connect them (the portion south of Garden City and east of Merriman Rd), thereby creating an African-American opportunity district. (It’s W 46.8, B 44.9 by total pop; W 50.7, B 42.4 by VAP.) Taylor then combines with the portion of Dearborn Heights south of Ford Road to make HD-16.

The final two districts are then HD-18 (Garden City and the portion of Westland west of Merriman Rd) and HD-17 (Redford, the part of Livonia not in HD-19, the part of Dearborn Heights not in HD-16, and the part of Westland not in HD-18 or HD-22).

The Detroit-based district here are more representative than predictive. I don’t know enough about the incumbent representatives to know which the Republicans might favor or disfavor through redistricting. But you can see in general terms what Detroit looks like with three fewer districts than before.

HD-01 is still majority white, although slightly less so. (It should therefore become less competive for the Republicans.) HD-12 is no longer majority Hispanic. It previously contained every heavily-Hispanic precinct it could; its necessary growth diluted the Hispanic percentage down to 44.5% by total population and 39.2% plurality by VAP.

Conclusion

Republicans could potentially net as many as four state House seats in Wayne County from their control of the redistricting process: the three that are disappeared from Detroit (depending on where they end up) and HD-21, a competitive seat that will be somewhat less Democratic than before.

Well, I have to say, this surprises me:

Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) has announced he will not run for Senate, despite openly discussing the possibility for weeks.

Franks had been preparing to challenge Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) in a GOP primary for the seat left open by Sen. Jon Kyl’s retirement.

“After diligently and prayerfully trying to consider every aspect a potential Senate bid would entail, I have sincerely concluded that mounting a Senate bid at this time would not be what is best for my family, nor what would best allow me to serve my country at this critical time in her history,” Franks said in a statement released from his Congressional office.

If this is an April Fool’s “joke,” I will murder someone. Dave Catanese probably wants to throttle someone, too. Anyhow, I really figured Franks would make a go of it – Jeff Flake’s apostasy just presents too juicy a target for some winger not to go for it. The thing is, Franks was probably their strongest guy. The other three GOPers in AZ’s House delegation are all freshmen (and include the comical Brock Landers Ben Quayle).

So who could do it? Would John Shadegg come out of retirement? J.D. Hayworth make another run? Is this the opening Joe Arpaio’s been looking for? Who are your suggestions for the Great Conservative Hope to take on liberal RINO Jeff Flake?

Her dude or just… Some Dude?

Senate:

• AZ-Sen: The NYT has a piece about Dems tip-toeing around the Senate race as they wait for Gabby Giffords to recover (and make a decision), but I think it adds very little to the conversation. There isn’t really any new information in the piece, so you can probably skip it.

• MA-Sen: Wow, the DSCC is doing a bang-up job on MA-Sen this week. A couple of days ago, they conned Roll Call into writing a piece which argued that the lack of a Democratic candidate was actually a good thing and all part of some devious plan. Now comes word that they’ve managed to leak a poll that shows Scott Brown with a ridiculous 73% approval rating and supposedly beating all comers by double digits. Aren’t they supposed to only leak polls when they’ve got good news to share? Sheesh. This is just so sloppy. (Also, 73% approval? Really? Might want to think about hiring a new pollster for this race.)

Anyhow, another Dem is feeling out the race: Gerry Kavanaugh, who was once Ted Kennedy’s chief of staff and is now a political consultant, says he’s “thinking about” a run. Kavanaugh has never run for office before.

• MO-Sen: This is pretty weird. Tons of documents, including a lot of emails, generated during GOPer Sarah Steelman’s tenure as state treasurer have disappeared, and the new treasurer (who is a Dem) is saying in response to freedom of information requests that they simply can’t be found. As Catanese says, this ought to give Steelman’s primary opponents some good fodder… especially if any of the missing docs ever turn up.

• NV-Sen: Rep. Shelley Berkley’s leaked a poll (taken for her by the Mellman Group) which shows her up 42-38 over Republican Rep. Dean Heller in a hypothetical Senate race. The more I think about it, the more I feel this really is Berkley’s moment and that she should definitely go for it. I think Obama’s going to run a very strong campaign here, and I just think the timing is right.

Gubernatorial:

• MI-Gov: Republican-linked pollster Marketing Research Group gives Gov. Rick Snyder the best numbers he’s seen so far, with a 42-38 job approval rating. But spiderdem shows just how implausibly favorable to Snyder the sample composition is.

• UT-Gov, UT-01: Interesting: GOP Rep. Rob Bishop refused to answer a question about whether he plans to challenge Gov. Gary Herbert, instead seeming to make some crack about ex-Gov. John Huntsman’s run for president. Herbert has raised some teabagger ire for signing an immigration reform package that would, among other things, allow for guest workers (the nutters call it “amnesty”) – basically, the opposite approach from Arizona. I’m not sure if Bishop’s expressed his views on this legislation, but he’s definitely a hard-core anti-immigrant zealot.

• WV-Gov: Treasurer John Perdue is out with his first ad – and it’s a two-minute long (!!) behemoth.

House:

• AZ-01: This is an old (May 2010) but interesting article on ex-Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick’s relationship with Apache Indians in her former district, who constitute an important voting bloc. I highlight it because, of course, she just announced her intention to seek a rematch against Republican Paul Gosar. Apache leaders, who supported her first election bid in 2008, felt betrayed over her support of a controversial copper mine on what they consider to be sacred land and walked away from her last year. However, as sacman701 points out, Kirkpatrick’s vote drop-off in Apache County in 2010 was very minimal.

• MN-08: Here’s something else interesting (okay, every bullet in the digest is an unparalleled gem and I love them all equally): Dem Lt. Gov. Yvonne Prettner Solon, who used to be a state Senator, is supposedly considering a run against freshman GOPer Chip Cravaack, according to a Politics in Minnesota source. One problem, as the piece notes, is that if she won, Republican Senate President Michelle Fischbach would become the new Lieutenant Governor. As someone who lived through the near-death experience of having Pedro Espada half-a-heartbeat away from the governor’s mansion, I wouldn’t blame Minnesota Dems if they wanted Prettner Solon to stay put!

• NY-01: I think a key reason why Dem Rep. Tim Bishop was able to hang on by the skin of his political teeth last year was because of the exceptionally nasty three-way GOP primary on the other side of the aisle – one which took place very late (September) to boot, giving eventual winner Randy Altschuler little time to recover. So it’s very heartwarming to see that another 2010 candidate, George Demos, is already slagging Altschuler for failing to win “in a year Republicans couldn’t lose.” Both men are considering rematches, and according to Dave Catanese, are meeting with the NRCC. Cat fud comin’!

• PA-03: This is also interesting (there I go again!): Ex-Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper is considering a rematch against GOP frosh Mike Kelly. I say “interesting” because I wouldn’t have considered her among the likeliest batch of people to seek a comeback, and I don’t think I’d really heard her name since last November. Anyhow, Dahlkemper says she’s spoken with the DCCC, and while she wouldn’t announce a timetable for a decision, she doesn’t want to wait until the fall (as she did in 2007 when she first ran). The same article also mentions another potential Dem candidate whose name has come up in recent days but apparently hasn’t ruled anything out: Erie Mayor Joe Sinnott.

• WI-07: Sean Duffy’s handlers seem to have a very 19th century understanding of the Internet: They’ve demanded the already-infamous video of him moaning about getting by on $174K a year get removed on copyright grounds. This is sure to make the story go away. Actually, I’ve changed my mind: They have a decidedly 21st century appreciation of the ‘net: After they sent a takedown letter to Talking Points Memo, TPM re-posted a shorter version of the video – which now, in a reverse Breitbart claim, Duffy’s people are saying was selectively edited. Of course, this is bullshit, but they’ve succeeded in getting CNN to repeat it as fact.

Other Races:

• Wisconsin Sup. Ct.: This is really interesting (wow, I just can’t help myself today): Craig Gilbert of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel points out that there are two key special elections in the state’s two biggest Democratic counties on Tuesday, which of course coincide with the Supreme Court race. One we’ve mentioned before: In Milwaukee, voters will replace their former County Exec, who was none other than Scott Walker. The Dem there, Chris Abele, has devoted his campaign to linking his Republican opponent with Walker. Meanwhile, in Dane County (home of Madison), the exec decided last year to leave in the middle of her term, prompting a new election. While Dane is reliably liberal, Milwaukee isn’t always, but given the contours of this year, Gilbert thinks the voter surge in Milwaukee is more likely to be left-leaning. But you should really read the whole piece, as there’s a lot of interesting data (and a cool chart) that I can’t convey in one short bullet.

Remainders:

• PPP: Politico has a feature-type piece about our buddies at Public Policy Polling, with some details about the deal with DK/SEIU, and a longer discussion of how PPP really has not becomes viewed as a left-leaning Rasmussen… mostly because their numbers are actually, ya know, good.

Redistricting Roundup:

• Arkansas: Despite strenuous GOP opposition, Arkansas Dems are moving ahead with their so-called “Fayetteville finger” plan that moves the city into Dem Rep. Mike Ross’s 4th CD. They did pass a new, somewhat modified plan (you can see a map at the link), but it still preserves the extension into Fayetteville. (Several Republicans plans have gotten voted down as well.)

• Indiana: State Senate Democrats have released a couple of proposed maps, including one for their own body (PDF) and one for Congress (PDF).

• Louisiana: Hah! Remember that fucker Michael Jackson, who ran as an independent in 2008 and cost Dem Rep. Don Cazayoux his hard-won seat in Congress? Well, in his role as state Rep., he’s put out a propose congressional map that would create two majority-minority districts in Louisiana. I assume they have no chance of seeing the light of day, though. You can find it here.

• Missouri: The first proposed congressional redistricting plan has emerged from the Missouri state House, and it looks pretty much exactly like what you’d expect: Russ Carnahan’s district has been flushed down the oubliette. (Map at link.) The state Senate plans to release a map soon, too.

• Mississippi: Mississippi has a serious redistricting logjam, and with the end of the legislative session fast approaching, no one seems inclined to give in. The article I’ve linked says that Gov. Haley Barbour could call a special session, but Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant (who after a big initial setback seems to have reasserted himself as the GOP’s point man on redistricting) seems almost eager for the impasse to continue. If it does, that would mean two sets of elections: one this year under the old maps, and one next year under new maps. Bryant is really starting to warm to this, because Republicans would very likely take control of the state House this November under the existing lines, which would then give them a free a hand. But if a new plan (with a Dem gerrymander in the House) goes into place this year, it gives Democrats at least something of a chance of holding the House – which is why House Speaker Billy McCoy’s over-reach was really so stupid.

• New Jersey: Things are coming to a head in the Garden State, with the final vote on a redistricting plan by the members of the state’s bipartisan commission scheduled for noon on Sunday. What the maps actually will look like is anybody’s guess, as the panel’s leader/tiebreaker, Alan Rosenthal, has ordered repeated revampings. (Chris Christie has also been seen leaning heavily on the panel members.) Leaked maps (we haven’t actually seen copies of them, but apparently everyone is willing to describe them to reporters) seem rife with intra-party intrigue, with several Dem state legislators who’ve fallen out of favor (including ex-acting Gov. Richard Codey) getting the short end of the redistricting stick. At the Congressional level, the same dynamic is playing out, with rumors that Rep. Frank Pallone of NJ-06 is the House member likeliest to get dealt the worst hand. Apparently he’s also out of favor with the currently ruling Dem power brokers, who’d like to derail him from an anticipated statewide run. (The whole story is worth a read, for a guided tour of the byzantine behind-the-scenes working of New Jersey politics.)

• Virginia: The Virginia Public Access Project has some cool interactive charts you can play around with which show how the various redistricting proposals would affect the state legislature.

This is a pretty amazing story – and not the kind of thing you want to see happen during the final weekend of your campaign:

Former Democratic Gov. Patrick Lucey is withdrawing his support for incumbent Justice David Prosser for Wisconsin Supreme Court and is throwing it to Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg.

Lucey released a statement to the media Thursday evening saying the campaign has revealed what he called “a disturbing distemper and lack of civility” in Prosser, though he did not cite specifics.

“I have followed with increasing dismay and now alarm the campaign of Justice David Prosser, whom I endorsed at the outset of his campaign and in whose campaign I serve as the honorary co-chairman,” Lucey said in the statement. “I can no longer in good conscience lend my name and support to Justice Prosser’s candidacy. Too much has come to light that Justice Prosser has lost that most crucial of characteristics for a Supreme Court Justice-as for any judge-even-handed impartiality. Along with that failing has come a disturbing distemper and lack of civility that does not bode well for the High Court in the face of demands that are sure to be placed on it in these times of great political and legal volatility.”

Lucey, age 93, served as governor of Wisconsin in the 1970s and was also the running mate of independent presidentical candidate John Anderson in 1980. Lucey may have declined to cite any examples of Prosser’s behavior, but I sure will:

• He bellowed that a fellow justice was a “bitch” and vowed to “destroy her” – then blamed her for his outburst
• He claimed that the same justice and another female colleague “ganged up” on him in an attempt to make him look bad
• He confided to Republicans and right-wing allies that they could be sure how he’d rule on topics like redistricting and abortion rights – all but prejudging cases in advance

And those are just a few examples of Prosser’s lack of a proper judicial temperament. I haven’t even touched upon the fact that he promised he’d be a “complement” to Gov. Scott Walker and the Republicans in the legislature, on account of the fact that his views “closely mirror” theirs. Lucey’s critique of Prosser aligns very much with the case Kloppenburg and her supporters have been presenting all along, and it helps ensure that this will be topic #1 for the campaign’s final days. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

Yesterday I created lists of the biggest gainers and losers among congressional districts over the period of 2000-10, but only hinted at the changes in racial composition that were underlying the overall population changes. A longer post about the racial composition (analogous to this one I did a year and a half ago) changes is in the works, but as part of that I conceived of this table… which really would have worked better with yesterday’s piece, so I’m giving it its own home here. It shows the numeric change in each district, broken down by the numeric change among each race in each district.

What should stand out here is that among the 25 biggest gainers, in most of the districts, the combined non-white gains exceeded the (non-Hispanic) white gains. Among the few that didn’t, some are districts that are either heavy on retirees (AZ-02, FL-05), some have a large Mormon population (AZ-06, UT-03), with a few a little harder to classify (GA-09 is sort of the exurban white flight receptacle from the rest of the Atlanta area, and ID-01 is a mix of a lot of Mormons and a lot of white flight from southern California). As always, as I’ve cautioned many times before, these districts aren’t an immediate panacea for Democrats and look to stay fairly red for the short term; with most of these districts full of kids (kids who aren’t likely to grow up to be Republicans, though!), gains at the ballot box are going to unfold slooooowly.

District	Rep.	Total change	White change	Black change	Asian change	Hispanic change
NV-03	Heck (R)	378,510	108,587	40,011	71,132	136,127
AZ-02	Franks (R)	331,404	171,702	20,194	14,194	110,853
AZ-06	Flake (R)	330,373	183,522	18,103	23,727	89,920
TX-10	McCaul (R)	329,844	81,819	49,129	31,182	159,747
FL-05	Nugent (R)	289,814	178,699	27,165	10,496	65,238
CA-45	Bono Mack (R)	275,656	56,706	17,886	22,645	170,850
GA-07	Woodall (R)	272,680	10,327	123,993	47,477	80,659
TX-26	Burgess (R)	263,279	112,403	20,457	21,450	100,522
TX-22	Olson (R)	259,220	10,994	66,263	64,288	112,521
TX-31	Carter (R)	250,233	108,700	24,991	16,193	89,632
NC-09	Myrick (R)	232,672	96,914	62,615	15,404	47,784
VA-10	Wolf (R)	225,723	58,443	19,165	65,737	71,862
UT-03	Chaffetz (R)	221,687	116,807	4,236	7,233	79,400
FL-14	Mack (R)	219,658	99,639	23,344	7,121	85,608
AZ-07	Grijalva (D)	214,773	31,852	14,353	7,048	154,255
NC-04	Price (D)	207,446	95,066	30,678	30,282	43,656
CA-44	Calvert (R)	205,748	15,323	8,961	36,006	142,532
CA-25	McKeon (R)	205,552	– 11,603	33,418	23,554	156,518
TX-21	Smith (R)	205,024	69,035	13,983	15,086	102,114
FL-12	Ross (R)	202,103	38,827	46,963	8,079	101,630
TX-28	Cuellar (D)	200,565	25,648	3,741	3,060	166,375
TX-23	Canseco (R)	196,502	36,500	8,704	8,756	139,265
TX-04	Hall (R)	194,642	93,402	19,450	12,972	60,583
GA-09	Graves (R)	193,905	116,666	8,550	9,842	53,801
ID-01	Labrador (R)	193,008	141,065	2,289	3,448	39,020

[Ed. note: This is impressive work. I took the liberty of moving the list of demographic & political info into a table. – David]

There was a request for the .drf file that I created for the Howell proposal of the VA State Senate, so why not make a diary.

For the .drf file, click here.

Caution: the Howell plan splits precincts, which I don’t think Dave’s App allows for. On some districts, it’s a judgement call, like on the borders of the 15th & 20th districts or the 7th & 14th districts. The non-ability to split precincts is also why districts will have the variances in population.

And yes, the numbers correspond to the Howell numbers, i.e. District 1 below is District 1 in the Howell plan.

Data table below the fold.

Under the Howell lines:

21 Senate districts voted for Obama and have a history of voting Democratic

2 Senate districts voted for Obama but have a history of voting Republican

17 Senate districts voted for McCain and have a history of voting Republican

Public Policy Polling (PDF) (3/24-27, Florida voters, Dec. 2010 in parens):

Bill Nelson (D-inc): 50 (44)

Mike Haridopolos (R): 34 (32)

Undecided: 17 (24)

Bill Nelson (D-inc): 48 (46)

Adam Hasner (R): 32 (30)

Undecided: 20 (25)

Bill Nelson (D-inc): 48 (47)

George LeMieux (R): 33 (36)

Undecided: 19 (17)

Bill Nelson (D-inc): 47 (44)

Connie Mack IV (R): 34 (36)

Undecided: 18 (20)

Bill Nelson (D-inc): 45

Joe Scarborough (R): 32

Undecided: 22

Bill Nelson (D-inc): 47

Jimmy Wales (R): 28

Undecided: 25

(MoE: ±4.4%)

At least three names tested here are almost certainly out of consideration. Mack as you know said last week that he wouldn’t run. The NRSC dumped all over Scarborough a few weeks ago after he revealed they’d been recruiting him; the hostility level there soared to “Ernie” almost overnight. And Jimmy Wales is just some libertarian fantasy candidate – he’s the founder of Wikipedia and has plenty of baggage of his own. (Long before Wikipedia, he created the porny site Bomis, and in later years tried to whitewash references to it from his own Wikipedia profile!)

That leave the bumbling Haridopolos, the would-be teabagger fave Hasner, and the one-time Charlie Crist acolyte LeMieux. I’m not writing any of these guys off, but it’s not a terribly inspiring field (which explains why John Cornyn was chatting up Joe Scar). I wouldn’t be surprised at all if another big name got in, whether we’re talking some random rich dude ala Rick Scott, or Rep. Vern Buchanan (who is himself also a rich dude). Bill Nelson got absurdly lucky in 2006 when he faced Katherine Harris; he won’t be that fortunate again, but he may still benefit from a weakish field.

Anyhow, to the numbers. As Tom notes, Nelson’s scores with members of his own party are kinda low:

38% of voters approve of the job Nelson’s doing to 34% who disapprove. Those numbers sound uninspiring but the main reason for them is that only 55% of Democrats approve of the job he’s doing, where you’d usually expect someone to be in the 70-80% range within their own party. Nelson gets 74-80% of the Democratic vote against each of the Republicans we tested him against so this is a classic case where his base might not love him, but they’re still going to vote for him.

I agree – I think these folks will come home for Nelson, especially with Obama at the top of the ticket. Tom makes another good point:

Most of the time people focus on politicians’ approval number when analyzing their reelection chances and if you do that in Nelson’s case 38% doesn’t look so hot. I think it might be more instructive here though to look at Nelson’s disapproval number – is someone who only 34% of voters are unhappy with really going to get tossed out of office? Seems doubtful – certainly didn’t happen to any Senators or Governors last year.

Not loved, but not hated. That might just be good enough for 2012.

Iowa’s independent redistricting commission released its first drafts of the state’s Congressional & legislative maps. (Click the link for all kinds of goodness, including a Google Maps overlay.) The new proposed federal plan – which sees the state dropping from five districts to four – is below (click image for larger size):

I’m cribbing from DCCyclone here:

This map throws together Loebsack and Braley, and also Latham and King, while leaving Boswell alone in his Polk-based district. Loebsack could just move down a few miles from Linn County to Johnson (Iowa City). Latham and King won’t be happy, and I bet this map gets rejected for that reason… no way can I imagine the Iowa GOP going along with giving Boswell a free pass while making Latham and King fight it out.

Note that the legislature can reject this map and send the commission back to the drawing board.

UPDATE: Iowa is one of the only states in the nation which keeps all counties whole in redistricting, so that makes presidential results easy to calculate. Here are the new figures by CD (full spreadsheet here):

UPDATE 2: I’ve added dots on the map to denote current incumbents’ homes, taken from here. To match up dots to congressmen (current CD in parens):

Black Hawk: Braley (1)

Linn: Loebsack (2)

Polk: Boswell (3)

Story: Latham (4)

Sac: King (5)