Will NC become larger than Georgia?

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Seems very plausible based on the 2020-2021 population changes, at which NC was growing faster than GA. Will be a very close-run thing either way, though.

I'm a bit confused about their 2021 estimates though because they seem to be in line with their 2020 estimates rather than the true 2020 numbers. For 2021 numbers, they have states like NY and RI (which outperformed in the census) doing rlly badly), whereas underperformers like NC and AZ did really well.

It's well established that the 2020 census numbers erred in a meaningful way.  The North was generally overestimated by several % and the South was generally underestimated by several %.  The 2020 census error margin was on a scale not seen since before WWII.  I would be very careful extrapolating these numbers.  

How do we know that it's actually an error on the census's part rather than them just being lazy with estimates?

It'd be hilarious though if Trump singlehandedly cost Rs an extra seat in FL and TX they otherwise would've gotten.

They acknowledge it here: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/05/2020-census-undercount-overcount-rates-by-state.html

The New York overcount and the Florida and Texas undercounts are likely >500K people each.  This is not normal.  

If true, those are some really awful errors. I can understand underoc**nting, especially in states like TX where you have a lot of non-English speakers and stuff, but overcount in NY? It's not like we just have tons of abandoned homes that they could say people live in or smtg.

Yes.  Unless something happens to make life in the South uniquely undesirable, we are likely to see a ton of CDs move in 2031.  I wouldn't be shocked by something like TX +4, FL +3, AZ+2, GA +1.

Where do those seats come from? You think wv, ri, ny, midwestern states lose more? Maybe ca continues to stagnates

WV just lost a seat so it should hold it's 2nd seat for another few decades.

RI and NY are def both vulnerable to losing another seat.

The usual midwestern suspects who've been losing for a while (PA, IL, OH, MI), with an off chance of smtg from IN, MN, and/or WI.

AL

Chance of CT and/or NJ.

And CA could def lose another seat, possible a few.

Possible guess here: TX +4, FL +3, AZ +2, GA +1, WA +1, RI -1, OH -1, NY -2, PA -1, IL -1, OH -1, MN -1, MI -1, AL -1, NJ -1.

With the notable exception of Florida, I fully expect Democrats in the other listed sunbelt states to have a say in redistricting by then, whether through control of the governor's mansion or at least one house of the legislature.  

That is not how AZ works! Arizona has an Independent Redistricting Commission, membership of which is determined by a commission which is (substantially) appointed by the Governor, but tends to lag because it's for a fixed time. Thus, AZ redistricting tends to advantage (although not by much, since there are strict rules here) who won the gubernatorial election before the last one: in 2011, it advantaged Democrats (because Janet Napolitano had won in 2006), and in 2021, it advantaged Republicans (because Doug Ducey had won in 2014). In 2031, it will advantage whichever party wins the 2026 gubernatorial election; the legislature actually doesn't come into it much.

My actual guess is that GA will probably be controlled by Democrats by then almost no matter what, given how fast the demographic trends are there; by contrast I think TX will probably be controlled by Republicans unless 2030 is a really severe Republican midterm (in which Democrats win a landslide). By contrast, it's probably plausible that Republicans will still control GA if 2030 is a Democratic midterm.

~~

It should also be noted that a Republican trifecta elected at the federal level in the 2020s, if such a thing happens, will at least attempt to pass voting rights legislation which would include a codification of Evenwel redistricting at the federal level (a conservative court would probably find Congress not to have the authority to do this at the state legislative level), which would change congressional redistricting within a state to depend on CVAP rather than total number of persons (which is actually how most democratic countries -- such as, eg, all of Europe -- do it). Reapportionment between states would remain on the old formula (total persons) since it is constitutional. This would force a large-ish number of seats from urban areas to rural ones, particularly in Sunbelt states (CA/FL/TX), and make the 2030 redistricting process more of a ticking time bomb for Democrats than it already is.

~~

They acknowledge it here: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/05/2020-census-undercount-overcount-rates-by-state.html

The New York overcount and the Florida and Texas undercounts are likely >500K people each.  This is not normal.  

If you do the math, then Florida, Texas, and Tennessee should all have an extra seat, and Colorado, Minnesota, and Rhode Island should all have one less. This cost the GOP two seats (all three of the new ones would be red seats, but the seat MN would cut would also likely be one of the red outstate ones). CO was on the bubble regarding gaining a seat or not, and it'll very likely hold on to the 8th seat in 2030, but MN and RI verge on certain losses, while FL/TX/TN all verge on certain gains. (OTOH, it feels like MN nearly loses a seat every Census, and then it never actually pans out, so maybe not).

One of the most unexpected results of the Census -- that AZ didn't gain any seats, even though it was expected to gain 1 and have an outside chance at 2 -- is apparently thought to be "true". Meanwhile, TN wasn't thought to even have a chance; it gaining would've been very unexpected. (AZ is still expected to gain 1-2 in 2030, though; it is growing, just not as fast as had been thought).

I forgot about Tennessee.  That would obviously help R's in the EC.  It seems pretty clear a Dem Nashville seat would be unavoidable on a 10 seat map with 10 more years of local trends there, though. 

Regarding Republicans codifying CVAP or registered voters redistricting, that's as much of a pipe dream as Dems passing HR1 in this past congress unless they somehow get 60 senate seats. 

Regarding Texas, remember Democrats can lose the statewide legislative PV by as much as Biden lost in 2020 and still plausibly take the lower chamber.

A Dem trifecta in Georgia is truly unlikely this decade because of the state senate, however I would be shocked if Dems still don't have a say in state government after 2030.  An underrated possibility is that Georgia Republicans do a Virginia and put a redistricting commission amendment on the ballot before they lose control.

I actually think the TN GOP would have been satisfied with getting the new seat in an 8-2 map and wouldn't have drawn out Cooper.  That seems especially likely considering that they didn't actually chop Nashville in the most efficient way (it wouldn't have been hard to keep everything Trump +20, but they left Ogles's district at Trump +11) due to concerns of the incumbents.