Party control over redistricting

[timmer123]

Reps will control OK, TN, PA and IN after the '10 election, and maybe OH.  Move Colorado to split. Perhaps MN and NH too.

Dems control RI, ME, CT, MA and it matters not one bit.  Nothing to lose in those states for Republicans.  WV and AR law prohibits county spliting, so no gerrymandering there.  Dems cannot possibly squeeze another seat from NC, they are already overrepresented there.

[timmer123]

This is the first year since I became interested in politics that the concept of redistricting has been used. I'm still a little confused on the process, so if anyone could clarify for me, I'd appreciate it. I just have a couple questions.

First, when is the redistricting going to take place? In November 2010, representatives will still be elected from the current congressional districts, right? I'm assuming they will go into effect for the 113th Congress (2013-2015)? Also, does the redistricting process take place on the same day (do all the state legislatures do it on the same day)? I guess the question I'm asking is when will we know the new congressional districts?

Also, is there any data out there right now as to what states will gain/lose seats and which ones will stay the same? Someone on here (believe his name is muon2) has a neat little diagram as his signature on here; was just wondering how people come up with that. I know it's based upon population but was just curious if there's a website out there that shows the forecast/most likely seats/district each state will have.

Sorry for the confusing questions and thank you to anyone who answers them for me

Hillary for President?  Lord have mercy.  Please become un-interested in politics.


Redistricting is the process of re-drawing the US House of Representatives districts in each state that has at least 2 seats.  Since last redistricting in 2001 the populations have changed and they need to be redrawn so that each district has approx. the same number of people again.  The number of seats each state has in released in Dec.  Some states will lose seats, some will gain because of state-by-state pop. changes.

[timmer123]

Reps will control OK, TN, PA and IN after the '10 election, and maybe OH.  Move Colorado to split. Perhaps MN and NH too.

Dems control RI, ME, CT, MA and it matters not one bit.  Nothing to lose in those states for Republicans.  WV and AR law prohibits county spliting, so no gerrymandering there.  Dems cannot possibly squeeze another seat from NC, they are already overrepresented there.

Republicans have an even money bet on split control with increased legislature representation in ME and it would matter if they made CD2 (i think its 2) more republican and Pingree's district more democratic.  NH is going to be difficult because Lynch is on the ticket, but it can be done if they win the state legislature.  Republicans are likely to sweep the senate race and the two house races there.  Dems have a slight chance of having some authority in AZ if Goddard wins and picks the "independent commission" - I think that will be a big win because we are getting 2 seats next apportionment. 

Factually you are correct.  My point is that most states to be controlled by Dems during 2011 redistricting are unimportant.  We have NOTHING to lose in HI, NM, VT, RI, MA, CT and ME.  And for now Dems are overrepresented in OR, NC, AR and WV as it is.

Its possible we gain some, but that remains to be seem.  I don't know off the cuff what the margins are in the ME legislature, but ME does not redistrict until 2013 so it wont matter yet.  NH's legislature is volatile, but I think we can retake it due to anti-Democrats mood there.

[timmer123]

The Dems should be able to reverse several horrenous Republican gerrymanders throughout the U.S.

Hahah. The irony is that Republicans will likely control Pennsylvania,the most "horrendous" Republican gerrymander from 2001.

Don't try to go to virtuous there, buddy.  BOTH parties are offenders.

DEM gerrymandering in Maryland, Massachusetts, Georgia and Illinois was worse.

[timmer123]

And Georgia backfired anyway, and was reversed mid-decade. Really the only solidly benefitial Dem gerrymander was Maryland, and that only earned two seats, one of which probably would've fell anyway.

MD-02, in which I live, would not have elected a Democrat had Parris Glendening and the imperial legislature not drawn a distasteful seat meant for their buddy Dutch Ruppersburger.
MD-08 would have gone Dem.

Knowing the state of Maryland, I'd have to say that the Maryland map is THE WORST gerrymander from 2001.

Whomever drew Illinois, it was pathetic.  A legitimate map in Ill. would yield 9 Rep seats anyway.  It's not our problem ALL the Dems are concentrated in Chicago.

And Massachusetts IS a very, very bad gerrymandering. Those districts snake all over the state on purpose so not one Republican is elected.

[timmer123]

And Massachusetts IS a very, very bad gerrymandering. Those districts snake all over the state on purpose so not one Republican is elected.

Kindly explain how a Republican is elected from that.

You know full well that Presidential and Congressional voting patterns are quite detached from one another.

Republicans typically do well in Plymouth/Barnstable counties.  If the likes were not too horribly skewed, a Republican could be elected to the house from that area.

[timmer123]

And Massachusetts IS a very, very bad gerrymandering. Those districts snake all over the state on purpose so not one Republican is elected.

Actually I think they mostly do it for very different reasons (to give Worcester its own district and so on and so forth). A perfectly fair map of Massachusetts would not have elected a Republican since, say, the late 90s.

You know full well that Presidential and Congressional voting patterns are quite detached from one another.

Republicans typically do well in Plymouth/Barnstable counties.  If the likes were not too horribly skewed, a Republican could be elected to the house from that area.

Also, most Mass. house Dems have run ahead of the presidential nominee.

Well that's not hard to do when half of them never have an opponent.  Still 36% of the state voted Republican for President.  That should yield at least 1 seat out of 10.

Even if they can't make a Rep seat in MA, the districts still should be un-gerrymandered.


As for "vile" MD, of course it's the state I know the most about because I live here.

Balto. City is a bit "vile."  Decades of mismanagement by Democrat mayors and city councils have not been good.

MD 1 snakes through Baltimore Co. unnecessarily.
MD 2 snakes all around Baltimore Co and Anne Arundel Co. and contains 4 non-contiguous pieces of Balto. City
MD 3 another horribly shaped zig-zag district
MD 4 contains 2 pieces almost severed form each other
MD 5 relatively decent
MD 6 stretches excessively far east
MD 7 ridiculously pairs trashy West Baltimore with rural Howard Co.
MD 8 tacked on highly Dem precincts in P.G. Co just to make sure Mark Shriver won against Connie Morella (except he lost the primary)

The Dems butchered Harford Co (my home from one district into three)
Balto Co. butchered into 5 districts, A.A. Co into 4.

I think the 3 worst from 2001 were Georgia, Maryland, Pennsylvania.