Friday was the pivotal day in the California redistricting process, with the independent redistricting commission voting on the maps that were sorta-officially unveiled Thursday ... and the
maps passed! There was some minor drama over whether the maps would attract enough Republican votes to pass, as there's a requirement that the final map gain at least three votes from each of the three camps on the commission (the 14-member commission is composed of five Democrats, five Republicans and four independents). In the end, three of the five Republicans voted "yes" (along with across-the-boards yes votes from everyone else), so it cleared the bar.
Friday's vote was for "tentative approval," and "final action" won't be until Aug. 15, so it's theoretically possible that more changes could be in the offing. However, all parties are making it sound like this is more or less a done deal, with the only major challenge remaining in the form of possible Republican litigation and/or initiative efforts to undo the entire commission (which, of course, was created by the initiative process, with many Republicans supporting it at the time).
Unfortunately, the state doesn't have maps available in any fixed format, so we're a little short on graphics, other than the overview shot you see above. However, here is the link to the commission's GIS site, which gives you access to cool software that lets you zoom in and out of the map around the state. Links to the also-approved state Senate, Assembly and Board of Equalization maps are also available there.
So ... what's the damage on the final maps? As you might recall, when they were first unveiled, it looked like a Democratic windfall, with a likely +4 seats. However, the new maps released Thursday have rejiggered a lot of the lines, especially in the suburbs to the south and east of Los Angeles. I've picked over the online map carefully ... and it still looks like a +4 map for the Democrats.
The Republicans who are most likely going to need to start updating their resumes are, just as with the old map, still Elton Gallegly, David Dreier, Gary Miller and Brian Bilbray. In addition, the luckless Janice Hahn, who just got sworn in last week, promptly finds herself without a district (with the previous odd-woman-out, Lucille Roybal-Allard, now set to stay), though there's no Democratic loss associated with that one, as Hahn gets the unenviable choice of running against Henry Waxman in West L.A. or against Maxine Waters in a district with few white voters. Also, one of Brad Sherman and Howard Berman seems poised to go too, though Berman could try running in the more-heavily-Latino descendant of his old district (where a Hispanic city councilor is already declared).
(UPDATE: One other possibility for Hahn is that she could run in the new 44th, a district which probably has a Latino majority and can't be more than 10 percent white, but which does contain her house! She lives in the San Pedro neighborhood of Los Angeles (where the port is, distant from any other part of L.A.) and under the newest version of the map, it's lumped in with Compton and Carson.)
The likeliest Republican loss is to come in the new 26th, where Elton Gallegly has been drawn into a fairly blue district (actually, his house may still be in the 25th, as the newest version of the lines seems to cut his hometown of Simi Valley in half); Gallegly has attempt to retire several times before, and maybe he'll actually follow through this time. Another likely loss is the new 32nd, where David Dreier finds himself in a Hispanic-majority district in the San Gabriel Valley. He might go district-shopping elsewhere, but with or without Dreier, this one looks like a pickup.
Ed Royce, who had talked of running further south under the preliminary lines, now finds himself with a district again, but also finds Gary Miller drawn into it too. (Miller, who lives in the Asian-majority town of Diamond Bar, had previously been drawn into a district with Judy Chu. Chu, however, now finds herself in a more regularly-shaped district in the San Gabriel Valley, but one probably with a Latino rather than Asian plurality.) Again, Miller can go district-shopping rather than run against Royce (who doesn't have the ethical cloud over him that Miller does), but Democrats are likely picking up the new district that popped up to the east of his vaporized old district, a Hispanic-majority seat centered on Riverside.
The fourth seat that seems to lean in the Democrats' direction is the vacant seat in northern San Diego. I suspect Brian Bilbray will run here rather than fight Darrell Issa in a primary, since a more moderate version of Bilbray represented a similar-looking version of this district for two terms back in the 1990s. A victory by Bilbray here could limit the Democrats to three pickups, although there's also a definite possibility for a pickup in Sacramento's suburbs in the new 7th/old 3rd. Ami Bera is running a rematch against Dan Lungren, in a district that's gotten swingier.
One Democratic source of concern may be Lois Capps in the new 24th/old 23rd, who got a swingier district and is facing well-known and ostensibly-moderate former Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado. Another potential problem is John Garamendi, who's probably running in the new 3rd (he's listed as being based in Walnut Grove, but his famous/infamous ranch is squarely in the new 3rd), which is a swingy, partly-rural district very similar to the one Vic Fazio used to represent in the 1990s, and where he might need to tone down his liberalism to be a better fit. The Central Valley also is a bit of a question mark, where Hispanic Democrats Jim Costa and Dennis Cardoza, and Anglo GOPer Jeff Denham, will need to figure out how they're divvying up the three reconfigured districts in Modesto, Merced and Fresno, all of which are currently pretty swingy. If any of them leave one of these seats open, that could go either way. (jncca has an excellent diary up already, diagnosing a lot of these same problems.)
Cook's Dave Wasserman has, as you'd expect, been all over the new maps, and, in addition to arriving at predictions similar to mine, has also been calculating some of the 2008 presidential percentages of some of the more interesting districts (presumably using DRA?). Some examples include:
• Garamendi (if he runs in the new 3rd) goes from 66.1% Obama to 56.2%
• Denham (if he runs in Modesto) goes from 46.9% Obama to 51.5%
• Lungren goes from 50.2% Obama to 52.9%
• McNerney's new seat goes from 54.7% Obama to 57.9%
• Dreier (if he stays in the SGV) goes from 52.1% Obama to 62.8%
• Baca drops from 69.3% Obama to 57.8%
• Gallegly goes from 51.4% Obama to 57.8%
• Capps goes from 66.9% Obama to 57.7%
• Bilbray (if he runs in N. San Diego) goes from 52.1% Obama to 54.8%
• Davis (if she runs in Chula Vista/National City) goes from 67.6% Obama to 64.5%
As we collect more data, we should have all the usual goodies you've come to expect from Daily Kos Elections, like full presidential numbers, race and ethnicity numbers, and distribution breakdowns from the old district, so keep your eyes open!
More data over the fold ...
Here's a chart of the newly numbered and configured districts (along with the abbreviated Canadian-style riding name they've been working with ... many of which, unfortunately, have changed since the map's first iteration, so I'm not sure how valuable that is). Also I'm including what I've deemed to be their current ancestor district(s), and which representative is in which district and the town where they live. If you want to see the previous version of this table, based on the earlier maps (to get a sense of how they evolved), you can see that here.
New District |
Old District(s) |
Rep. (or Reps.) |
1 (MTCAP) |
2 |
Herger (R) (Chico) |
2 (NOCST) |
1 |
OPEN (was Woolsey (D) (Petaluma)) |
3 (YUBA) |
2, 10 |
Garamendi (D) (somewhere near W. Sacramento) |
4 (FTHLL) |
4 |
McClintock (R) (Roseville) |
5 (NEBAY) |
1, 6 |
Thompson (D) (St. Helena), Geo. Miller (Martinez) |
6 (SAC) |
5 |
Matsui (D) (Sacramento) |
7 (SACCO) |
3 |
Lungren (R) (Gold River) |
8 (INMSB) |
41 |
Lewis (R) (Redlands -- his house may be in new 31st, though) |
9 (SNJOA) |
11, 18 |
McNerney (D) (lives in Pleasanton, but has confirmed he'll run here) |
10 (STANI) |
18, 19 |
OPEN (but likely target for Denham (R) |
11 (COCO) |
7, 10 |
OPEN (Geo. Miller (D) likely to move here) |
12 (SF) |
8 |
Pelosi (D) (San Francisco) |
13 (OKLND) |
9 |
Lee (D) (Oakland) |
14 (SNMAT) |
12 |
Speier (D) (Hillsborough) |
15 (FRENE) |
13 |
Stark (D) (Fremont) |
16 (MRCED) |
18 |
Denham (R) (Atwater), Cardoza (D) (Atwater) |
17 (SANJO) |
15 |
Honda (D) (San Jose) |
18 (SNMSC) |
14 |
Eshoo (D) (Atherton) |
19 (SNACL) |
16 |
Lofgren (D) (San Jose) |
20 (MONT) |
17 |
Farr (D) (Carmel) |
21 (KINGS) |
20 |
Costa (D) (Fresno -- his house may be in new 16th) |
22 (FRSNO) |
21 |
Nunes (R) (Tulare) |
23 (KR) |
22 |
McCarthy (R) (Bakersfield) |
24 (SLOSB) |
23 |
Capps (D) (Santa Barbara) |
25 (AVSCV) |
25 |
McKeon (R) (Santa Clarita) |
26 (EVENT) |
24 |
Gallegly (R) (Simi Valley -- his house may be in new 25th) |
27 (SGVP) |
26, 32 |
Chu (D) (Monterey Park) |
28 (SGMFH) |
29, 30 |
Schiff (D) (Burbank) |
29 (SFVET) |
28 |
OPEN (new Hispanic D) |
30 (SFVWC) |
27 |
Sherman (D) (Sherman Oaks), Berman (D) (N. Hollywood, though his house may be in 29th) |
31 (SB) |
43 |
Baca (D) (Rialto) |
32 (COVNA) |
26, 32 |
Dreier (R) (San Dimas) |
33 (WLADT) |
30, 36 |
Waxman (D) (L.A.), Hahn (D) (L.A.) |
34 (ELABH) |
31 |
Becerra (D) (L.A.) |
35 (ONTPM) |
26, 38 |
OPEN (new Hispanic D) |
36 (COACH) |
45 |
Bono Mack (R) (Palm Springs) |
37 (IGWSGF) |
33 |
Bass (D) (L.A.) |
38 (DWWTR) |
39 |
Napolitano (D) (Norwalk), Linda Sanchez (D) (Lakewood) |
39 (LHBYL) |
40, 42 |
Royce (R) (Fullerton), Gary Miller (R) (Diamond Bar) |
40 (DOWNTOWN) |
34 |
Roybal-Allard (D) (L.A.) |
41 (RVMVN) |
44 |
OPEN (new Hispanic D) |
42 (PRS) |
44, 49 |
Calvert (R) (Corona) |
43 (IGWSG) |
35 |
Waters (D) (L.A.) |
44 (COMP) |
37 |
OPEN (but Richardson (D) (Long Beach) will run here) |
45 (STHOC) |
40, 48 |
Campbell (R) (Irvine) |
46 (SNORN) |
47 |
Loretta Sanchez (D) (Anaheim) |
47 (LBPRT) |
37, 46 |
Richardson (D) (Long Beach) (but Richardson will run in new 44th, Linda Sanchez (D) seems like she'll run here) |
48 (WSTCST) |
46, 48 |
Rohrabacher (R) (Huntington Beach) |
49 (CSTSN) |
44, 49 |
Bilbray (R) (Carlsbad), Issa (R) (Vista) |
50 (NESAN) |
52 |
Hunter (R) (Lakeside) |
51 (IMSPN) |
51 |
OPEN (was Filner (D) (San Diego)) |
52 (MMRHB) |
52, 53 |
OPEN (seems likely that Bilbray (R) may run here) |
53 (CHNCS) |
51, 53 |
Davis (D) (San Diego) |