Skip to main content

That's how many of us there are, according to the 2010 United States Census. U.S. Census Director Robert Groves announced the results this morning at the National Press Club.

The South was the region with the largest growth, at 14.3 percent, followed by the West at 13.8. Nevada was the fastest growing state, with a 35.5 percent increase.

Congressional apportionment numbers below the fold. While the presser is still going on, you can watch it at c-span.org.

Eight states will gain members in the House:

Texas +4
Florida +2
Arizona +1
Georgia +1
Nevada +1
South Carolina +1
Utah +1
Washington +1

Ten states will lose members in the House:

New York -2
Ohio -2
Illinois -1
Iowa -1
Louisiana -1
Massachusetts -1
Michigan -1
Missouri -1
New Jersey -1
Pennsylvania -1

These numbers aren't good for us--especially Texas, which owes much of its gain to a larger Latino population, but where you can be sure that Rick Perry and the Republicans will gerrymander each of those four new seats to maximally benefit conservative white Texans. Of the states that gained and lost seats, only Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey, and Washington use independent commissions to draw district boundaries; in the others, the state legislature controls redistricting. Considering the list of affected states, that would seem to forecast grim tidings indeed.

Originally posted to phenry on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:31 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I was about to post a diary on this...amazed that (9+ / 0-)

    ...there isn't a front page liveblog on this...

    A few key points so far:

    --Texas gains 4 house seats up to 36

    --Michigan will lose 1 down to 14

    --7 States will have 1 representative.

    --Average 710,767 is house district size.

    •  Emphatically Agree (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      trashablanca

      Demographics and Population Growth are Destiny.

      Workforce Growth is one of the components of GDP growth (the other being productivity).

      And, with respect to political considerations, we are in trouble.  

      Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. http://www1.hamiltonproject.org/es/hamilton/hamilton_hp.htm

      by PatriciaVa on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:43:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  only for ten years.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        trashablanca

        because the rise in non-white population in the US will have begun it's mid-century rise by then.

        I know, it's another decade of shite, as regards representation for non-white, non-Republicans... but there is a day coming when the Census data will surely ring the deathknell of the conservative, Republican grip on the nation.

        If we can hang on long enough to get there.

        "in Order to form a more perfect Union"
        Basta de Guerra. No más. Enough War. No more.

        by Angie in WA State on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 10:26:24 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Yeah, and (5+ / 0-)

    154,372,279 in poverty. What a country!

  •  I'll be the first (14+ / 0-)

    to spin the results to fit my agenda:

    The reapportionment shows the extreme importance of turning Latino/a Americans into a reliable Democratic constituency with an attachment to the label, and the efficacy to do something about it (i.e., vote).

    Hint: just sitting around and waiting for Republicans to piss them off won't cut it over the long term.

    In Rand McNally, they wear hats on their feet, and hamburgers eat people!

    by cardinal on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:39:56 AM PST

  •  Change to electoral college (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus, penguins4peace

    States Obama won +4.
    States McCain won +8.
    States Obama won lose 10.
    States McCain won lose 2.

    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

    by blue aardvark on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:40:03 AM PST

  •  This is a painful thing to say, but... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus, LionelEHutz, Cedwyn

    ...we need more Congressmen.

    That is, 710,000 apiece is too damned many people per district.

    The Constitution gives a minimum of 30,000/district, but doesn't give a maximum; we've been stuck at 435 Reps for decades now, for no particular reason--Congress just kept growing to that point, then stopped (aside from a brief flirtation with 2 extra seats when Hawaii and Alaska were added...but the total was lopped back down to 435 soon thereafter).

    I dunno, maybe they just ran out of room for seats/offices at the Capital or something.

    No, 1:30,000 would mean a whopping 10,000 Congressmen, which would be a bit absurd, but they should at least bump it up to 600 or so (1 per half-million).

    •  Although honestly, I think 1:100,000 (0+ / 0-)

      ...would be more appropriate, though that would also mean 3,000 Representatives (shudder...)

      Can you imagine the barrage of campaign lit and TV ads? The mind boggles.

      •  No, I definitely can't imagine (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Angie in WA State, Brainwrap

        65 different House races in the DFW media market.  Yikes!

        In Rand McNally, they wear hats on their feet, and hamburgers eat people!

        by cardinal on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:48:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No more than for state leg races, I'd think. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Odysseus, Brainwrap

        With that many more people running for office, the races would get cheaper per race, but there would be enough of them that the corporations would have to spend a lot more to buy the House.

        It would open up the office to the people.

        I'd support 1:100,000.

        What have you done for DC statehood today? Call your Rep and Senators and demand action.

        by mistersite on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:54:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  cheaper per race? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Brainwrap

          You'd have more buyers for each ad slot.

        •  I got dibs on the Texas 252nd district (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Angie in WA State

          If we had a 1:100,000 ratio, the apportionment by state would be (with 3088 members of the House):

          Alabama 48
          Alaska 7
          Arizona 64
          Arkansas 29
          California 373
          Colorado 50
          Connecticut 36
          Delaware 9
          Florida 188
          Georgia 97
          Hawaii 14
          Idaho 16
          Illinois 129
          Indiana 65
          Iowa 31
          Kansas 29
          Kentucky 43
          Louisiana 45
          Maine 13
          Maryland 58
          Massachusetts 66
          Michigan 99
          Minnesota 53
          Mississippi 30
          Missouri 60
          Montana 10
          Nebraska 18
          Nevada 27
          New Hampshire 13
          New Jersey 88
          New Mexico 21
          New York 194
          North Carolina 95
          North Dakota 7
          Ohio 116
          Oklahoma 38
          Oregon 38
          Pennsylvania 127
          Rhode Island 11
          South Carolina 46
          South Dakota 8
          Tennessee 64
          Texas 252
          Utah 28
          Vermont 6
          Virginia 80
          Washington 67
          West Virginia 19
          Wisconsin 57
          Wyoming 6

          "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

          by craigkg on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 10:10:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  600,000. (8+ / 0-)

    The number of taxpaying American citizens who will continue to have no representation in the House of Representatives and no representation in the Senate.

    And we're going to have to fight to even keep what little voice we are given, since the Republicans are likely to strip Del. Norton of her vote in the Committee of the Whole.

    This should be absolutely unacceptable to anyone who calls him- or herself progressive. Call your Representative and Senators today and demand DC statehood, and then call major progressive organizations like MoveOn and DFA and demand that they make DC statehood a movement priority.

    What have you done for DC statehood today? Call your Rep and Senators and demand action.

    by mistersite on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:51:43 AM PST

  •  Texas v. Justice Department (3+ / 0-)

    Republican Texas is the big winner, and the entirely-Republican state government will do the redistricting to apportion out the seats.  Many observers expect that most or all of the growth in Texas is in the urban (Democratic) areas and in the Hispanic south.  Deeply Republican rural areas likely lost population.  The Republican state government will try to gerrymander the heck out of Texas to disenfranchise these growing populations.  However, they must get it by the Justice Department.  This is going to have to play out in court (most likely in front of Republican federal judges).  

    Hard to say how this will end.  

    "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly." - Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises.

    by weasel on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:58:22 AM PST

    •  i live here (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus, craigkg, ariseatex

      and don't think they can gerrymander us any further.

      they are losing the battle.  

      •  Possibly (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Odysseus

        HArd to say, really.  The state is very gerrymandered, but now there are 4 new districts to wedge into a more mixed population.  On the other hand, you have a Democratic Justice Department overseeing redistricting for the first time since...I don't know when.

        I'd expect massive lawsuits, I'd expect it to go to the Supreme Court, I'd expect fundamental attacks on the Voting Rights Act.  I certainly wouldn't shrug it off.  

        "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly." - Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises.

        by weasel on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:07:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  They have to get VRA pre-clearance (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Odysseus, phenry, weasel, Deep Texan

          They won't be able to get a badly gerrymandered map through this time because of the pre-clearance requirement. This is the first time we've had a Democratic administration handling the pre-clearance process over at DOJ. This is important. In the 2003 Delaymander of Texas, the DOJ's civil servant careerists found the Delaymandered map to be violative of the VRA, but the Bush DOJ political appointees overruled them and approved the map. The Supreme Court found the careerists were right, but the only violation sufficiently severe to require fixing was the split of Webb County which resulted in the judicial redrawing of several districts from SW Texas to the Lower Rio Grande Valley to Austin.

          "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

          by craigkg on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:32:48 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's my point (0+ / 0-)

            They won't get preclearance and it will go to
            the courts. The US Supreme Court is now much farther to the right.  I expect an attempt to invalidate to VRA. And it might succeed.

            "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly." - Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises.

            by weasel on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 11:04:51 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  same in Pennsylvania (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus

      they did it in 2001 when they drew a number of seats out of existence (although PA-17 and a couple others ended up not working out for them).

      Will be interesting to see which seat (I predict Murtha's old seat) gets written out of existence, and how they draw new districts. Highly gerrymandered too.)

    •  growth (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      weasel, ariseatex

      Many observers expect that most or all of the growth in Texas is in the urban (Democratic) areas and in the Hispanic south.

      True, but with a very important caveat.  The growth in the metro areas is mostly in the bright-red exurbs like Collin and Denton counties, north of DFW.

      In Rand McNally, they wear hats on their feet, and hamburgers eat people!

      by cardinal on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:07:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This will be a tough battle in NJ (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PatriciaVa

    New Jersey (−1 seat) New Jersey will use a commission to redraw its map. But the most Democratic districts in the state — particularly the 10th in parts of Newark and Jersey City and the 8th in Passaic and Essex Counties — are the ones that have lost the most population, so the Republicans have a mathematical advantage.

    - Silver

    If you lose your disc or fail to follow commands, you will be subject to immediate de-resolution. That will be all.

    by SpamNunn on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:58:59 AM PST

  •  we are (0+ / 0-)

    multitudes

    Those who hear not the music-think the dancers mad

    by Eiron on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:02:15 AM PST

  •  The bottom of the fill chart (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    N in Seattle, Odysseus, mndan, Gary J

    for the Apportionment of the seats. The last seat, the 435th, was Texas' 36th. North Carolina's 14th was the first after the cutoff:


                                                                                   
    seatstatestate
    seat
    state
    population
    seat
    priority
    432Florida2718801310709610
    433Washington106724540708829
    434Minnesota85303925708767
    435Texas3625145561708396
    436North Carolina149535483706817
    437Missouri95988927705802
    438New York2819378102704775
    439New Jersey138791894703915

    "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

    by craigkg on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:15:45 AM PST

    •  That's funny because (0+ / 0-)

      NC got the last seat in 2000 (over Utah's strenuous, court-battled objection, as I recall).

      In Rand McNally, they wear hats on their feet, and hamburgers eat people!

      by cardinal on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:16:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Great data (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      N in Seattle

      As someone in MN, this was a nail-biter. Losing a seat could have been a way to get rid of Bachmann. Although, it could have been a blue seat that would have been lost. Therefore, we're happy to keep our seat #434.

      What does "seat priority" mean? Is that the number of people in that district? Where did this data come from (link)?

      •  Data explained (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        N in Seattle, mndan, Gary J

        Each State's seat has a priority number based upon the state's population and seat number. The priority number is equal to the states population, P, divided by the geometric mean of the seat number and the previous seat number, i.e. for the Minnesota 8th, the priority number is 5303925 / sqrt (8 * 7) = 708767. The data above is from a spreadsheet I did using the method the Census Bureau uses. They are my number, not official Census Bureau numbers, but ought to be fairly accurate.

        "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

        by craigkg on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 10:04:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  same mistake I made yesterday (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          craigkg

          You're using "resident population", not "apportionment population".  With the correct data, the order changes quite a bit.

          For the purpose of getting the data out, I won't try to format as a table, but here's the correct list from #432 to #439:

          Seat      District                   Priority
          432       Washington-10        711868
          433       Texas-36                711857
          434       California-53           711308
          435       Minnesota-08           710231
          436       North Carolina-14    709063
          437       Missouri-09             708459
          438       New York-28           706337
          439       New Jersey-13        705164

          You're right about North Carolina just missing the cut, but it was Minnesota, not Texas, that edged ahead of NC.  Florida-27 was actually #431.

          grok the "edku" -- edscan's "revelation", 21 January 2009

          by N in Seattle on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 11:54:39 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm using the data they released today (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            N in Seattle

            the Apportionment data they released today is the Resident Population (where Resident is defined to include the overseas military personnel).

            "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

            by craigkg on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 12:06:34 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I downloaded the apportionment file... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              craigkg

              ...as an Excel file from the Census.

              It shows different numbers for state populations than you used.  For example, Washington = 6,753,369 instead of its resident population of 6,724,540.  

              I used that file, and the approach you outlined in yesterday's diary, to obtain my results.  Which, BTW, match what the Census Director said during his press conference ... Minnesota got #435.

              grok the "edku" -- edscan's "revelation", 21 January 2009

              by N in Seattle on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 12:22:31 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Good grief hey have too many similar tables (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                N in Seattle

                Thanks. The numbers displayed on their apportionment page aren't the apportionment number. Government bureaucracy at work. Off to modify my spreadsheet.

                "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

                by craigkg on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 12:30:31 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  actually, it's #435 (0+ / 0-)

        grok the "edku" -- edscan's "revelation", 21 January 2009

        by N in Seattle on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 11:56:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  130 million believe the world was created (0+ / 0-)

    in 6 days (and on the seventh day, He watched football and ate chicken wings)

    it takes a lot to laugh, it takes a train to cry

    by memofromturner on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:21:32 AM PST

  •  A few more numbers hastily crunched (7+ / 0-)

    The Wyoming Rule size of the house: 546 members

    The Wyoming Rule size is the size the House would need to be for every state to be mathematically entitled to at least one Representative. This is down from 2000's Wyoming Rule size of 570 members.

    States in the 2010 Census that would mathematically not be entitled to a U.S. Representative if the Constitution did not otherwise require each state to have at least one: Wyoming, Vermont and North Dakota.

    In 2000, the list was Wyoming, Vermont and Alaska. Alaska's population increase let them climb to #427 on the list this time around. North Dakota's slower growth caused them to fall from #434 in 2000 down to #456 in 2010.

    "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

    by craigkg on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:24:40 AM PST

  •  So make it backfire on them. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PatriciaVa

    These numbers aren't good for us--especially Texas, which owes much of its gain to a larger Latino population, but where you can be sure that Rick Perry and the Republicans will gerrymander each of those four new seats to maximally benefit conservative white Texans.

    Seriously, we need to analyze these districts, figure out which ones we can flip, and put a concerted effort into it.  I have been a voter registrar here in Austin for the last two cycles.  We need to get involved in the processes that will make gerrymandering hurt.

    -7.75 -4.67

    "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

    There are no Christians in foxholes.

    by Odysseus on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:41:58 AM PST

    •  First, we need a consensus Economic Policy (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Odysseus

      I do hope that President Obama repudiates his Deficit Commission during the State of the Union.

      For him to embrace entitlement reform while the median wage continues to decrease is to ask for a loss in 2012.

      Indeed, what possible excuse can President Obama use if come 2012 the real median wage is below that of 2008?

      Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. http://www1.hamiltonproject.org/es/hamilton/hamilton_hp.htm

      by PatriciaVa on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 09:47:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site