Census Winners (Texas) and Losers (Obama)
The Southern region of the United States will see its influence increase in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College in the next decade as a result of the 2010 U.S. Census, while the midwest and the northeast will have less clout. The biggest winner out of the government's decennial population count? It is without a doubt the state of Texas, which will see its House delegation and Electoral College representation increase by four seats.
And the losers? President Obama, for starters. Based on the results of the 2008 election, he will have a more challenging electoral map to face come 2012 thanks to the U.S. Census Bureau numbers released today.
The Census bureau announced that the U.S. population as of April 1, 2010 stood at 308,745,538. The state breakdown of the population -- including undocumented immigrants -- impacts the apportionment of the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. It also determines the apportionment of the 538 Electoral College votes used to elect the president of the United States. (The number of electoral votes granted to each state is equal to the number of representatives a state has in the House and the Senate.)
After determining the whereabouts of the nation's 300 million-odd people, the Census announced that 12 congressional seats will change hands -- eight states are gaining at least one seat in Congress, and 10 states are losing at least one seat.
Here's a breakdown of the states gaining seats:
Gaining four seats: Texas
Gaining two seats: Florida
Gaining one seat: Georgia, South Carolina, Utah, Arizona, Washington and Nevada
States losing seats:
Losing two seats: New York and Ohio
Losing one seat: Michigan, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Massachusetts
You'll note that of the 10 states that are losing House seats and electoral votes, Louisiana is the only one from the South, which as a whole grew faster than any other region.
The shift in seats reflects the population shift over the last 10 years. The South and the West saw the fastest growth, while the Northeast and Midwest grew at more sluggish paces. As for Louisiana's loss of a seat, some are questioning whether the shift can be attributed to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Census Bureau Director Robert Groves today gave no indication of the root causes for the population shifts.
Politically speaking, the shift translates into a growth in "red" states. Five of the eight states that are gaining seats gave their electoral college votes to Republican candidate John McCain in the 2008 presidential election, while eight of the 10 states losing seats went to Mr. Obama. If the new apportionment were applied to the 2008 presidential election, Mr. Obama would have had a net loss of six electoral votes.
Of course, it's hard to predict exactly what the losses and gains will mean for candidates in 2012. The Democratic Party is pushing back against the notion that the re-apportionment is a huge loss for the party.
"Democratic communities and constituencies have grown in size in states like Arizona, Florida, Nevada, and Washington," Steve Israel, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said today in a statement. "In states that will lose a seat, the number of Republicans who will be competing with each other creates opportunities for House Democrats."
In Texas, the population surge is largely attributable to the growing Latino population. While the redistricting process depends quite a bit on politics at the local level, it would be difficult for Texas lawmakers to redraw their House map without reflecting that growth. As Latinos see their influence rise in Texas, the Democratic party would, presumably, as well.
The actual redrawing of the House map won't begin for a few more months, when the Census Bureau releases data at the county level.
Who is breathing a sigh of relief today? Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, who may have been seen her seat eliminated from the House had her state lost representation. Her vulnerable position was somewhat ironic, given that the firebrand conservative last year criticized the Census Bureau's surveying methods -- potentially detracting from the Bureau's efforts to get as much participation as possible. Thankfully for Bachmann, Minnesota's representation remains unchanged.
Watch CBS News' Bob Schieffer and Nancy Cordes discuss the Census findings on CBSNews.com's "Washington Unplugged":
Popular in Politics
- Snowden: U.S. gov't destroyed my chance for fair trial 286 Comments
- Obama on NSA programs: Americans "not getting the complete story"
- Supreme Court strikes down Arizona voting law 691 Comments
- McCain demands answers from Obama on "secret" email accounts 91 Comments
- Amnesty Int'l calls for arrest of George W. Bush
- At G8, Obama announces launch of trade agreement negotiations
- Obama in Europe for G8 as Syria crisis looms large
- Jeb Bush: Parents "split" over my potential 2016 bid 159 Comments
Pahgre, feel free to have the last word....go ahead, win, if you can!
LOL
Yep, them damn RED welfare states always have their hands out for freebies, making us in the BLUE states work harder to support them!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pahgre, are you STILL going to argue that your meaning behind the posting was some theory on presidential elections?
Like I said, you should be glad to know that your blue tax dollars are going to the poor, minority filled blue areas of red states.
Do you know that there are only 11 "blue" states left? Do you still live in a blue state?
Your blue tax dollars are being spent on Democrats in Red States. You shouldn't have a problem with that......
just don't gripe any longer about having to subsidize red states, because if you do, I'll be right behind you proving where your dollars are REALLY going - You are just providing Democrat food stamp debit cards galore to your good minority friends in Dixie!
by oldbasicgal December 23, 2010 9:20 AM EST
Pahgre, this link is to the New York Times election map showing Representative changes in the U.S. Midterms. It shows in detail the gains of the Republicans in REpresentative numbers.
It also shows the blue areas left in each state. In the Southern States, these blue, Democrat Party areas are the very poorest in Alabama, some of the poorest in Georgia, the Carolina's and Tennessee. Also, border areas of the Southern Mid-West are remaining Democrat. These areas, as you know, are some of the poorest in the nation.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/results/house
You truly are a lonely old spinster, with nothing better to do. I just saw your moronic comments for the first time, and I'm trying to respond, but you seem to be just making it up as you go along. Again, the white papers by several university professors, compared RED states vs. BLUE states in the 2000/2004/2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS, and had nothing to do with the 2006/2010 MID-TERM ELECTIONS.
Please be my guest and try writing a WHITE PAPER on the comparison of the 2006 and 2010 MID-TERM ELECTIONS, but since there wasn't a nationwide election for anything, with many states not even having a Senate race, it was basically a LOCAL election in 2010 for the House of Representatives and for each DISTRICT -- LOCAL, NOT NATIONAL LIKE 2008.
_++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
by oldbasicgal December 23, 2010 2:31 PM EST
I'm not trying to point out the difference between presidential election and the mid-term elections. Why are you suddenly bringing THAT up? That never was or is the debate.
You said "your" blue states subsidizes red states. I'm showing you that your blue dollars go to feed Democrats in red states. You were the one crying about having to take care of red states. I'm pointing out that the reason your dollars go to red states is because of the blue areas in those red states.
It's just like you to change the subject when you have been proven WRONG. LOL.
Loser.
Five years after Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans public schools have received a $1.8 billion FEMA grant to build or renovate about 85 schools, Sen. Mary Landrieu announced Wednesday.
View full sizeJennifer Zdon/The Times-PicayuneThree new schools - Langston Hughes Elementary, photographed in August 2009, Greater Gentilly High School and L.B. Landry High School - and three renovations - William J. Guste Elementary, Andrew Wilson Elementary and Joseph Craig Elementary - are already finished.
The news came a day after Louisiana was rejected for a $175 million federal education grant, disappointing many local officials who had considered the state a shoo-in. August, 2010 Times-Picayune
That's what you do. And the reason I know you are wrong it because I didn't have to STUDY it, I LIVED it.
It also shows the blue areas left in each state. In the Southern States, these blue, Democrat Party areas are the very poorest in Alabama, some of the poorest in Georgia, the Carolina's and Tennessee. Also, border areas of the Southern Mid-West are remaining Democrat. These areas, as you know, are some of the poorest in the nation.
Shall I continue????
http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/results/house
Can't you admit I'm right?
You said blue states subsidize red states. I'm showing you that your blue dollars go to feed Democrats in red states. You were the one crying about having to take care of red states. I'm pointing out that the reason your dollars go to red states are because of the blue areas in those red states.
It's just like you to change the subject when you have been proven WRONG. LOL. Loser.
Yea, the RED coast line gets a lot of FEMA support; they also get a lot of hurricanes, oil spills, etc.
Look at the map. See the little blue areas in the red states? Your blue dollars are hard at work there, feeding those Democrats. Democrats feeding Democrats, how nice.....
Hey "oldrepublicangal," you seem like a little ankle biter, running around trying to debunk several professors' white papers on RED/BLUE states in the 2000/2004/2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS, with your absurd 2010 mid-term skewed statistics and partisan ideology. As a matter of fact, even a greater percentage of 2010 FEMA disaster money went to the RED states, so your argument keeps getting weaker and weaker and weaker!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is 2010, Pahgre, The midterms made a huge difference. Here's a link to the map I'm talking about, or go to CBS NEWS Political tab; Quick Links; Election Results, second map. Your blue dollars go to the blue area in the South. Aren't you happy that they are not being used to feed Republicans??????
Link to map. Go to second map showing Representatives by State. Check out RED state BLUE areas. ALL of these areas are poor, very high unemployment, very high rate of entitlement.
http://www.cbsnews.com/election2010/?tag=cbsnewsLeadStoriesAreaMain;cbsnewsLeadStoriesAreaMain.0