Prospective electoral vote allocation for the next decade

[muon2]

This was my projected apportionment when the last Census estimates came out in Dec. It looks like your allocation is mostly in agreement with mine.

Here's my annual projection from the new estimates. I used the July 2014 estimates and the April 2010 Census base to get an annual growth rate. This correctly accounts for the 3 and a quarter year period between the Census and the estimate. I then applied the annual growth rate to the 2010 reapportionment population to get the 2020 projection. This accounts for the extra overseas population used in reapportionment but not for redistricting. Ten years is a long stretch for a simple model like this, but here are the projected changes.

CA +1
CO +1
FL +1
IL -1
MI -1
MN -1
NY -1
NC +1
OH -1
PA -1
RI -1
TX +3
VA +1
WV -1

The only change since my projections last year is that CA is back to +1 and NY is back to -1 as they were after the 2012 estimate instead of even last year. They continue to be the most likely to change, and there is some shifting in the other bubble seats. The bubble seats in this projection are based on the last five awarded and the next five in line.
The last five awarded are CO-8, TX-39, VA-12, CA-54, and AL-7 (#435).
The next five in line are NY-27, OR-6, AZ-10, MT-2, MN-8.

[muon2]

Wait ... I did it all in vain??? 😨

Not necessarily. It's a good mathematical exercise, and you have one slight difference. I have AL getting seat number 435 and NY getting number 436. You have those states flipped compared to me, but both states will be on the bubble either way.

[muon2]

Wait ... I did it all in vain??? 😨

Not necessarily. It's a good mathematical exercise, and you have one slight difference. I have AL getting seat number 435 and NY getting number 436. You have those states flipped compared to me, but both states will be on the bubble either way.

Indeed. The divide between Alabama and New York really seems to be the pivotal line.

New York's remainder: 0.4936949502
Alabama's remainder:  0.4657998807

But I did it via mental math. Perhaps I miscalculated.

The seats aren't apportioned by remainders. The geometric mean (Huntington-Hill) is used instead, and that tends to help smaller states on the bubble.

[muon2]

The seats aren't apportioned by remainders. The geometric mean (Huntington-Hill) is used instead, and that tends to help smaller states on the bubble.

I've never heard of it before. I did the calculations "by instinct".
And as we all know that Wyoming and Vermont are waaay too underrepresented in the Electoral College, a method that helps smaller states "on the bubble" is much-needed...

The method of remainders results in some well known paradoxes, such as where the number of seats is increased but an individual state's share goes down. Huntington-Hill avoids that paradox and minimizes the percentage differences between the populations of the districts.