House Districts with no successor in 2030?

[ProgressiveModerate]

In the 2020 redistricting cycle, most old districts got a nearly equivalent or rough successor that mirrored the old district pretty well, with adjustments mostly being made for population or un some cases partisan reasons.

However, you also had some district outright eliminated, either through population loss or gerrymandering that have no successor at all.

A few examples are:

CA-47
FL-5
IL-11
MD-02
MD-03
MI-02
NY-22
NC-05
NC-09
NC-13
OH-06
OH-07
OH-12
PA-12
TN-05

2 notes. Firstly, 2 districts can have the same successor if the new district takes in the cores of both previous districts. Think how the new IL-15 is the successor for both IL-15 and IL-18 which mostly remain in IL-15. Secondly, just because the partisanship of a district changes a lot doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a succesor. Take a lot of the TX districts that the gop shored up big time even though they still connect essentially the same communities.

What districts are at risk of being cut either cause a seat is literally lost or just because the map dramatically changes?

Imo a few possibilities are:

AL-06 or AL-07 depending on the fate of VRA
CT-03
FL-10/FL-14/FL-20, especially if a commission draws the map
Something in Chicago, depends on who’s retiring
IN-01
MI-05 or MI-08
NY-07 and/or a Central Valley seat
OH-05
PA-04? Something’s gotta give but if Philly growth is strong maybe not
TN-05. I think a pack is re-done
If bipartisan redistricting control, then a bunch of TX seats
WI-06 if WI loses a seat

[GregTheGreat657]

MS-02, and SC-06 if the VRA falls

[ProgressiveModerate]

MS-02, and SC-06 if the VRA falls

In SC, a successful gerrymander needs a D pack; a bunch of Trump + 10ish seats would be iffy unless SC swings hard right over this decade. And generally any SC D pack will be black functioning.

MS is a bit more realistic. I think they may play a NC-01 card the gop tried where they basically make it competaive while not impacting the existing seats too much. It really depends upon how red MS is a decade from now; an R + 22 MS could easily go 4-0 but R + 12 that would be unlikely. I’d argued though if they just unpack MS-02 to make it competitive, it’s still a succesor district. Also worth noting MS-01 is harder to unpack than you may think, though again, we'll see how political geography is in a decade.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

MS-02, and SC-06 if the VRA falls

In SC, a successful gerrymander needs a D pack; a bunch of Trump + 10ish seats would be iffy unless SC swings hard right over this decade. And generally any SC D pack will be black functioning.

MS is a bit more realistic. I think they may play a NC-01 card the gop tried where they basically make it competaive while not impacting the existing seats too much. It really depends upon how red MS is a decade from now; an R + 22 MS could easily go 4-0 but R + 12 that would be unlikely. I’d argued though if they just unpack MS-02 to make it competitive, it’s still a succesor district. Also worth noting MS-01 is harder to unpack than you may think, though again, we'll see how political geography is in a decade.

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::ed6970d6-76cd-45e4-8a2d-d9bffba40521
My best effort at a 6R-0D map.
Likely impossible because of incumbent demands.

[ProgressiveModerate]

MS-02, and SC-06 if the VRA falls

In SC, a successful gerrymander needs a D pack; a bunch of Trump + 10ish seats would be iffy unless SC swings hard right over this decade. And generally any SC D pack will be black functioning.

MS is a bit more realistic. I think they may play a NC-01 card the gop tried where they basically make it competaive while not impacting the existing seats too much. It really depends upon how red MS is a decade from now; an R + 22 MS could easily go 4-0 but R + 12 that would be unlikely. I’d argued though if they just unpack MS-02 to make it competitive, it’s still a succesor district. Also worth noting MS-01 is harder to unpack than you may think, though again, we'll see how political geography is in a decade.

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::ed6970d6-76cd-45e4-8a2d-d9bffba40521
My best effort at a 6R-0D map.
Likely impossible because of incumbent demands.

Yeah and that would be quite risky too. We'll see how SC shifts over the course of the decade but I suspect it'll be pretty neutral; overall. Still a solid 6-1 map is pretty good for the GOP in an R + 15ish state.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

MS-02, and SC-06 if the VRA falls

In SC, a successful gerrymander needs a D pack; a bunch of Trump + 10ish seats would be iffy unless SC swings hard right over this decade. And generally any SC D pack will be black functioning.

MS is a bit more realistic. I think they may play a NC-01 card the gop tried where they basically make it competaive while not impacting the existing seats too much. It really depends upon how red MS is a decade from now; an R + 22 MS could easily go 4-0 but R + 12 that would be unlikely. I’d argued though if they just unpack MS-02 to make it competitive, it’s still a succesor district. Also worth noting MS-01 is harder to unpack than you may think, though again, we'll see how political geography is in a decade.

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::ed6970d6-76cd-45e4-8a2d-d9bffba40521
My best effort at a 6R-0D map.
Likely impossible because of incumbent demands.

Yeah and that would be quite risky too. We'll see how SC shifts over the course of the decade but I suspect it'll be pretty neutral; overall. Still a solid 6-1 map is pretty good for the GOP in an R + 15ish state.

That district running from Lexington to Berkeley counties is probably the most vulnerable GOP seat on that map.
Agreed that 6-1 in an R+15 state is a good deal for the GOP.

[ProgressiveModerate]

MS-02, and SC-06 if the VRA falls

In SC, a successful gerrymander needs a D pack; a bunch of Trump + 10ish seats would be iffy unless SC swings hard right over this decade. And generally any SC D pack will be black functioning.

MS is a bit more realistic. I think they may play a NC-01 card the gop tried where they basically make it competaive while not impacting the existing seats too much. It really depends upon how red MS is a decade from now; an R + 22 MS could easily go 4-0 but R + 12 that would be unlikely. I’d argued though if they just unpack MS-02 to make it competitive, it’s still a succesor district. Also worth noting MS-01 is harder to unpack than you may think, though again, we'll see how political geography is in a decade.

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::ed6970d6-76cd-45e4-8a2d-d9bffba40521
My best effort at a 6R-0D map.
Likely impossible because of incumbent demands.

Yeah and that would be quite risky too. We'll see how SC shifts over the course of the decade but I suspect it'll be pretty neutral; overall. Still a solid 6-1 map is pretty good for the GOP in an R + 15ish state.

That district running from Lexington to Berkeley counties is probably the most vulnerable GOP seat on that map.
Agreed that 6-1 in an R+15 state is a good deal for the GOP.

I suspect by 2030, you would not want to draw a district like that if you're gerrymadnering for the GOP because it's getting "urban spillover" from both Charleston and Columbia without solid exurban growth to cancel it out.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

MS-02, and SC-06 if the VRA falls

In SC, a successful gerrymander needs a D pack; a bunch of Trump + 10ish seats would be iffy unless SC swings hard right over this decade. And generally any SC D pack will be black functioning.

MS is a bit more realistic. I think they may play a NC-01 card the gop tried where they basically make it competaive while not impacting the existing seats too much. It really depends upon how red MS is a decade from now; an R + 22 MS could easily go 4-0 but R + 12 that would be unlikely. I’d argued though if they just unpack MS-02 to make it competitive, it’s still a succesor district. Also worth noting MS-01 is harder to unpack than you may think, though again, we'll see how political geography is in a decade.

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::ed6970d6-76cd-45e4-8a2d-d9bffba40521
My best effort at a 6R-0D map.
Likely impossible because of incumbent demands.

Yeah and that would be quite risky too. We'll see how SC shifts over the course of the decade but I suspect it'll be pretty neutral; overall. Still a solid 6-1 map is pretty good for the GOP in an R + 15ish state.

That district running from Lexington to Berkeley counties is probably the most vulnerable GOP seat on that map.
Agreed that 6-1 in an R+15 state is a good deal for the GOP.

I suspect by 2030, you would not want to draw a district like that if you're gerrymadnering for the GOP because it's getting "urban spillover" from both Charleston and Columbia without solid exurban growth to cancel it out.

Yes, but the worth of such a seat depends on whether it can deliver for Rs a majority of the decade, not by 2030. The purpose of a gerrymander is not to stay intact the whole decade but to deliver more net seats over an entire decade than alternatives.

[ProgressiveModerate]

MS-02, and SC-06 if the VRA falls

In SC, a successful gerrymander needs a D pack; a bunch of Trump + 10ish seats would be iffy unless SC swings hard right over this decade. And generally any SC D pack will be black functioning.

MS is a bit more realistic. I think they may play a NC-01 card the gop tried where they basically make it competaive while not impacting the existing seats too much. It really depends upon how red MS is a decade from now; an R + 22 MS could easily go 4-0 but R + 12 that would be unlikely. I’d argued though if they just unpack MS-02 to make it competitive, it’s still a succesor district. Also worth noting MS-01 is harder to unpack than you may think, though again, we'll see how political geography is in a decade.

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::ed6970d6-76cd-45e4-8a2d-d9bffba40521
My best effort at a 6R-0D map.
Likely impossible because of incumbent demands.

Yeah and that would be quite risky too. We'll see how SC shifts over the course of the decade but I suspect it'll be pretty neutral; overall. Still a solid 6-1 map is pretty good for the GOP in an R + 15ish state.

That district running from Lexington to Berkeley counties is probably the most vulnerable GOP seat on that map.
Agreed that 6-1 in an R+15 state is a good deal for the GOP.

I suspect by 2030, you would not want to draw a district like that if you're gerrymadnering for the GOP because it's getting "urban spillover" from both Charleston and Columbia without solid exurban growth to cancel it out.

Yes, but the worth of such a seat depends on whether it can deliver for Rs a majority of the decade, not by 2030. The purpose of a gerrymander is not to stay intact the whole decade but to deliver more net seats over an entire decade than alternatives.

Ah I see this is a gerrymander for this decade. Then ye it's pretty solid.

[Joseph Cao]

Surprised no one has mentioned RI-02 yet.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

One possibility: a House district located in East-Central PA. Presumably, this is where a seat would be most likely to be eliminated.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

I wouldn’t be surprised if West Virginia drops to at-large in 2030. Minnesota’s 7th and 1st might merge and the 1st become a mostly suburban Twin Cities seat

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I wouldn’t be surprised if West Virginia drops to at-large in 2030. Minnesota’s 7th and 1st might merge and the 1st become a mostly suburban Twin Cities seat

West Virginia, even with its population decline, should be absolutely safe for 2 districts until at least 2040. Remember, it still has more people in it than Manhattan...and it needs to almost halve in population before it loses that second seat.