Redistricting

#1
LouderVol

LouderVol

Extra and Terrestrial
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
53,870
Likes
53,502
#1
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#2
#2
LouderVol said:
Census Bureau to announce population numbers that will be used to reapportion congressional seats
I will be interested in seeing what changes happen with the census. I will post a link to the results when they come out.

Texas, Florida, Colorado, Montana, arizona, North Carolina, projected to gain.

Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennslyvannia, Rgode Island, New York, projected to lose.

Let the gerrymandering, and political guided complaining of it begin!
Click to expand...

Judging by traffic, TN is set to become the most populus state in the next couple of years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens, malinoisvol, VolStrom and 2 others
#5
#5
volinbham said:
I thought California was expected to lose a seat as well.
Click to expand...
Where did you hear that? I thought Cali was experiencing a net increase in population even though many are leaving the bigger metro areas,
 
#7
#7
I am looking forward to all the whining about unfair redistricting and gerrymandering from the liberals here. As if it is only the Rs who do it.

If you want fair districts and accurate voter representation, change the population to representative ratio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and NorthDallas40
#9
#9
LouderVol said:
Census Bureau to announce population numbers that will be used to reapportion congressional seats
I will be interested in seeing what changes happen with the census. I will post a link to the results when they come out.

Texas, Florida, Colorado, Montana, arizona, North Carolina, projected to gain.

Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennslyvannia, Rgode Island, New York, projected to lose.

Let the gerrymandering, and political guided complaining of it begin!
Click to expand...
Gerrymandering was going to happen regardless. It always has. But it does make the 2020 House contests very interesting. I don’t see how the GOP doesn’t get the House back.

Edit: as louder pointed out 2022
 
Last edited:
#15
#15
“The U.S. Census Bureau on Monday announced that six states, mostly in the South and Mountain regions, would gain seats in the U.S. House of Representatives based on updated population data results, while seven states were set to lose one seat apiece. Texas will gain two seats, the most out of any U.S. state. Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina and Oregon each gained one seat.

On the other hand, seven states, including California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, were set to lose one seat in the chamber each.” Census sweepstakes: Texas to gain 2 House seats while New York and California among the losers
 
#16
#16
McDad said:
Does the tweet mean roughly 5 million people left the states which dropped 1, anybody know?
Click to expand...
Going off this wikipedia's page only three states actually lost population. West Viriginia, Mississippi, Illinois. And it was only by thousands.

Overall we gained 22 million people

Despite having twice the population of Florida, California gained 400k less.

Utah had the highest percentage growth at 18.5%.

13 states (plus dc) gained in the double digits. Pretty much the south and west.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#18
#18
states-gaining-losing-seats-labelled.jpg
 
Last edited:
#20
#20
Ok I did some number crunching.

Of the top 10 growers by percentage, the states are split evenly red and blue. But the red are the top 4 growers.

Of the bottom 10 growers by percentage, 6 are blue states. But the red are the bottom 2, and two of the only three with negative growth rates.
 
#21
#21
Some other interesting, non political, information to come out of this. The US grew an average of 7.4%. 30 states fell under that. Meaning that the top growers grew fairly significantly. Again as a percentage.

16 states rose in the overall population rankings. Some multiple spots.

As far as pure numbers texas grew the most with more than 4 million new bodies. Almost double the second most of Florida at 2.7 million.

Montana crossed the million mark.

Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina all passed the 10 million mark.

New York and Florida both crossed 20 million.

California is just under 40 million people at 39,576,757. But fell below the national average for percentage growth, but not by much.

Of the top growers by percentage, all 5 of them were west of the Mississippi.

Utah was the highest growth rate at 18.5%,

west Virginia was the only state to lose more than a tenth of a percentage point at -3%.

And at .96% growth (lowest positive) Connecticut looks like my chances of ever getting laid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#22
#22
Boot Maxine out and that'll settle California.
 
#23
#23
Ok. Now that the results are in, let me ask: What does fair redistricting actually look like? Or if the inverse is easier, what does "gerrymandering" look like. If you want to use examples of states that have been caught gerrymandering please provide a link to a map.

For me the easiest thing to point to are the geometry. If it's not a contiguous blob its bad. If it looks like a squished octopus with lots of trailing arms and weird, but contiguous shapes, it's bad. I dont think it has to follow county lines. Depending on how many overall districts there are in the state I could see a party gaining more seats than their growth indicates as a call for foul play. But I think its unavoidable in some cases.

What type of change has to be present to be bad? How do you balance some large rural districts picking up some small urban or suburban areas? Is race considered? Is district segregation racist? Or is integration racist?

Does a left or right leaning state adding a district that favors the predominate party automaticallh mean foul play? Or does it just show the demographics at play? How do you determine what a state should be? Last election we saw a weird split. Presidential voting went one way, but congressional voting went the other. So how do you call those states?

Let's get some actual standards applied, past court cases are acceptable as long as you spell it out for the class.
 
#24
#24
LouderVol said:
What type of change has to be present to be bad? How do you balance some large rural districts picking up some small urban or suburban areas? Is race considered? Is district segregation racist? Or is integration racist?.
Click to expand...
These are good questions. I've considered them, too. Should a voter be lumped with similar voters in an effort to provide more cohesive representation? I think they should. I also think all the demographic data should be considered.
If I am a rural farmer grouped in a district that is 80% affluent people commuting to the big city, will my representative be as likely to heed my concerns?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and hog88
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top