More on the 2011 Reapportionment

Last week I wrote about the projected 2011 reapportionment of congressional seats, referring to DavidNYC’s article from December. This week I took a closer look at the data and I was struck by how volatile the projections are. (Note that the link to the EDS study in DavidNYC’s article is outdated. Correct one is here.) From that Election Data Services study is a table showing, for projections based on longer or shorter term trends, which seats are the closest to changing states.

	"Long-Term"	“Mid-Term”			"Short-Term"
Seat #	2000 – 2008	2004 – 2008	2005 – 2008	2006 – 2008	2007 – 2008
430	FL - 27th	PA - 18th	SC - 7th	SC - 7th	PA - 18th
	173,092	56,292	27,259	22,995	55,526
431	CA - 53rd	SC - 7th	TX - 36th	PA - 18th	CA - 53rd
	234,276	18,815	130,143	45,584	160,531
432	PA - 18th	TX - 36th	PA - 18th	TX - 36th	SC - 7th
	60,143	97,569	57,612	35,474	19,807
433	TX - 36th	OR - 6th	OR - 6th	NY - 28th	NY - 28th
	116,578	5,475	7,396	24,543	44,260
434	NY - 28th	NY - 28th	NC - 14th	NC - 14th	TX - 36th
	83,731	18,638	15,098	3,754	50,998
435	SC - 7th	FL - 27th	NY - 28th	OR - 6th	OR - 6th
	5,199	9,924	16,146	2	2,558
436	OR - 6th	NC - 14th	WA - 10th	CA - 53rd	WA - 10th
	4,394	5,053	5,571	18	4,431
437	WA - 10th	CA - 53rd	CA - 53rd	WA - 10th	NC - 14th
	17,806	41,677	59,094	15,613	16,307
438	NC - 14th	WA - 10th	MN - 8th	MN - 8th	MN - 8th
	38,055	9,807	33,601	32,861	32,317
439	MN - 8th	MN - 8th	FL - 27th	LA - 7th	IL - 19th
	23,465	34,736	120,655	32,822	116,222
440	MO - 9th	MO - 9th	MO - 9th	MO - 9th	MO - 9th
	41,724	43,173	48,991	54,257	64,505
441	IL - 19th	IL - 19th	IL - 19th	IL - 19th	FL - 27th
	129,514	145,987	143,322	130,938	281,147

The seats are listed in order, so “seats” 436 and above are virtual seats – they would exist only if congress had more. This shows which state is next in line. The values are the margin of population (that’s individuals) by which a seat would be gained or lost. (Note that the values in a column are not strictly ordered. This is because of the population size of the states. If these were percentages, they would be strictly ordered.) In their document EDS says

Some of the margins are the closest ever observed since Election Data Services, Inc. began doing apportionment studies nearly 30 years ago. For example, using the 2006 to 2008 trend analysis, Oregon would gain a 6th seat (and the last one issued, number 435) with just 2 persons to spare. Using the same trend analysis, California would lose a seat (its 53rd) by a margin of only 18 people.

And look at that, Washington Staters, given the “Mid” and “Short” trends, Washington State is in the running for getting another district!!! Bottom Line: it’s likely to be very close, and you can expect some states will be complaining that the Census Bureau wasn’t counting right. A recount? Maybe Norm Coleman can use his experience to sue for Minnesota, if his current contest is over by then… Seriously, it looks to be very close between California, Oregon, North Carolina, New York, Washington, South Carolina, Texas and Minnesota. And throw in Pennsylvania and Florida, with a chance of changing the current projection. 5 of those 10 states will get the last 5 seats. The table below shows the difference in seats gained or lost from 2000 if they get one of those seats or not:

Seat Gain/Loss from 2000
State	Doesn't get 1 of last 5	Gets 1 of last 5
California	-1	0
Florida	+1	+2
Minnesota	-1	0
New York	-2	-1
North Carolina	0	+1
Oregon	0	+1
Pennsylvania	-2	-1
South Carolina	0	+1
Texas	+3	+4
Washington	0	+1

Should be interesting...