« Why is the Corporate Media Ignoring Sibel Edmonds? Do we need a VIRTUAL CONGRESS to protect our lawmakers from outside influence? | JEP07's Blog | "...a growing number of Americans beginning to credit the President's stimulus package with helping to revive the economy." »
How many red congressional districts face extinction or revision due to potential census figures?
It's an angle on the census issue that has been evolving for a couple days here at the TPM blogs, based on a theory that some of the vehement dialog emanating from Republican lawmakers against the census, might well be explained by those lawmakers' vulnerability to the results of that census.
So, not knowing where to start for this kind of information, I thought it might be worth challening some of our lurking experts to pitch in with some stats, and links there-to, if they are even available.
There may already be a website somewhere that addresses this very issue, but thus far my google-search word-combinations aren't providing me with anything but obscure references.
I think this evolving "theory" that the loudest census naysayers are identifying themselves as inevitable census victims could be fleshed-out better if we had an idea of just where and how many red districts could see the census axe fall, due to population changes and movement.
Considering that states like Iowa and Minnesota, both facing potential district amalgamation and redistricting due to population loss, are now under Democratic majorities, it is no surprise some red and purple districts are afraid they might be turning blue.
So, what other states or districts may see similar changes, and are those Reps(R) crying the blues already, in the form of criticism of the census itself, like Bachman and King?
So, not knowing where to start for this kind of information, I thought it might be worth challening some of our lurking experts to pitch in with some stats, and links there-to, if they are even available.
There may already be a website somewhere that addresses this very issue, but thus far my google-search word-combinations aren't providing me with anything but obscure references.
I think this evolving "theory" that the loudest census naysayers are identifying themselves as inevitable census victims could be fleshed-out better if we had an idea of just where and how many red districts could see the census axe fall, due to population changes and movement.
Considering that states like Iowa and Minnesota, both facing potential district amalgamation and redistricting due to population loss, are now under Democratic majorities, it is no surprise some red and purple districts are afraid they might be turning blue.
So, what other states or districts may see similar changes, and are those Reps(R) crying the blues already, in the form of criticism of the census itself, like Bachman and King?
Advertisement
Here's hoping Michele Bachmann (Insane - MN) will be redistricted into Betty McCollum's area. I am not much of a fan of McCollum, as she publicly disrespected Sen. Franken during the campaign (giving the opposition ammo is always a truly bad idea) but she routinely runs up 60-70% numbers in alternate Novembers.
September 25, 2009 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
You might be interested in reading A Citizen's Guide to Redistricting from the Brennan Center for Justice. It is written so even I can understand it.
http://brennan.3cdn.net/58180b7e66ce3d66bb_5sm6bvr97.pdf
If I do understand it, the results will effect the election in 20012 and not 2010--which means there will be a double effect: The congressional power will shift, but so will the electoral college, and because that's winner take all, I expect the bigger effect will be there.
Thanks for putting this out for discussion. The recession is causing significant outmigration from some recently growing states (i.e. Florida) and I don't think anyone has factored that in to figuring out what the situation may be.
September 25, 2009 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the links.
September 26, 2009 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lots of information, easy to read and easy to reference.
Here's a key paragraph, from the "transparency" page in the PDF link you provided
"In some states, only a few insiders have a meaningful chance to get involved with
drawing the district lines. They may be on a committee within the legislature,
or a technical advisory group, or one of the commissions discussed above.
Decisions are made in secret, with little opportunity for those outside the room
to have input into the district lines, or the communities that end up represented."
Sounds like a scenario similar to counting the Florida vote in 2000. And in Alabama in 2002.
Redistricting is, essentially, the root of power base construction. No wonder they try to do it behind closed doors.
It has become an art form. Delay's tortured Texas rorschack redistricting map is a prime historic example of how twisted this process has become.
And check out California's 3rd district, it took a fine pen to separate all those gated Sacramento communities from their middle class neighbors and join them to the conservatives in the foothills to the east.
Dan Lungren was the result of that twisted district.
Transparency certainly matters in this process, if you believe in public government.
September 26, 2009 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
"recession is causing significant outmigration from some recently growing states"
I suppose the question is, has it staunched the flow AWAY from the red Iowa/Minnesota/et al districts?
SO many of those Floridians were retirees, and they got hit hard by the downturn.
Wonder if AZ and, no doubt NV, might see their growth fizzling, they were snowbird destinations, too. Southern Texas, too, maybe?
This downturn took the wheels off what might have been a mass migration, all those Minnie Winnies heading for the third coast have been parked. Some folks are probably moving into them, and putting their homes up for sale, because their 401K went belly-up.
September 26, 2009 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
To summarize: State legislative elections in the coming cycle are the most important of our lifetimes. Even mediocre Dems are better than Republicans in this instance. And Greens, or Reformers, or whatever, are no treat at all. They cannot be counted on to put down their "purity tests" and slowly step away from them at critical times.
Loath as I am to quote James Carville, this is a gem: "Don't get mad. Don't get even. Just get elected, then get even."
September 26, 2009 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
'Loath as I am to quote James Carville'
He's much easier to quote than he is to look at.
I'd pity his poor wife, if she wasn't a Republican shill.
September 28, 2009 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink