EDS Report: NY To Lose Two House Seats

Both will basically come from (0.00 / 0)

the Capitol Region and south. Yes WNY, CNY and NNY are growing extremely slowly, but there's so little population there compared to NYC Metro up to Albany that only 1/2 of a seat will be lost from the slow-growth areas combined.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 13:38:28 PM UTC

It's not as simple as that (4.00 / 2)

First, I wonder about EDS's report. NY had been rumored early on to lose 2 seats but those estimates were scaled back to just 1. We are clearly on the borderline and 2 is quite possible. However, I've done a lot of playing with Dave's redistricting tool for various states along with some verification of the numbers with current census bureau estimates and I suspect that NY will only lose 1 seat. We'll see.

Second, you don't just eliminate a district. I mean, if we go from 29 down to 28 then it is district 29 that disappears. If we go from 29 down to 27 then it is districts 29 and 28 that disappear. But obviously that means other districts expand. All other districts expand.

Third, how that happens depends completely on the rules defined for the process. Do we create rules that demand compact contiguous districts? Or do we stick with the current rules that allow the Senate and Assembly to gerrymander districts in whatever way favor the party (parties) in power?

The good news for Democrats is that the demographics of the state have changed to such a degree that it will be entirely possible to create compact, contiguous districts across the entire state that favor Democrats. All of them.

With less gerrymandering then we have today it is possible to cut districts that voted for Obama by at least 54%... everywhere. Getting beyond 54% requires serious gerrymandering in some locales.

Lastly, it is entirely possible that Congress will adjust the number of seats for the first time in decades by finally providing Washington, DC with representation. They certainly should. As any representation DC receives would be a lock for Democrats you can be sure that Republicans will require a corresponding increase of seat(s) that will result in an equal or greater number for Republicans. An earlier suggestion had been a seat for DC and a seat for Utah. How that plays out with new census numbers remains to be seen. To craft a new compromise under the formulas used to determine reapportionment without screwing any particular state (as some are today) or providing an advantage to one or the other party (which would kill any such proposal) may require more than 2 seats be added. We'll see what they come up with.

I have played extensively with a 28 seat New York but not a 27 seat. I'll see how that draws up but I think it is safe to say that the fewer seats there are the greater the advantage for Democrats as it allows districts to more easily expand into urban areas and neutralize the few remaining Republican favoring rural areas.

The other thing to consider is how the State Senate seats are divvied up. Do we go back to 61 seats given the coup debacle? Again, the fewer the seats the easier to make them democratic. My preliminary playing at district creation showed that compact, contiguous districting created a strongly Democratic favoring Senate. With gerrymandering it was once again possible to cut every single Senate district as one that voted for Obama. It was even possible to get them all up to the 54% level just like the congressional districts. The only thing to bare in mind though is that several of the current Republican-held districts are also Democratic voting districts at the Presidential level (some strongly so) which means that even if all districts are cut in such a way as to favor Democrats it does not mean that all will elect Democrats to the Senate.

---

by: Andrew C. White @ Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 14:55:23 PM UTC

State Senate (0.00 / 0)

We don't go back to 61; if anything, we add seats.

Counting state senate seats is really screwed up.  You start with 50 and apportion them by county.  Then, for any county that gets more than 3 you have to add seats.  So if, say, Queens County gets 6 (out of 50), then you have to add three seats.  Once you have added seats, you reapportion based on the new number.

After the 2000 census they added a seat, sort of "fudging" the numbers in order to justify it, as part of some political maneuver (I forget the details).

Since NYC has been gaining population while most of the rest of the state has been losing, it stands to reason that the senate will increase by one or two seats.

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 15:29:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

priosoner's impact (0.00 / 0)

Assuming you are correct, then the counting of prisoners at home rather than in small upstate counties will also have the effect of increasing the number of Senate seats.  

---

by: jmcbride @ Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 18:15:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Can you clarify (0.00 / 0)

what you mean by:

You start with 50 and apportion them by county.  Then, for any county that gets more than 3 you have to add seats.

The Senate isn't always set at 60? The Senate is supposed to have some loose affiliation with county borders?  

---

by: nyspol1 @ Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 18:47:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Can you point me to the section of law (0.00 / 0)

that governs this? What you are describing is very screwed up indeed.

---

by: Andrew C. White @ Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 19:46:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's in the NYS Consittution..... (0.00 / 0)

Article III

http://www.dos.state.ny.us/inf...

See page 9 of the pdf document.

FYI - The 61st district was added in 1982 and Districts 58,59, and 60 were added in 1972.

________________________________________________

Here are a few NY Times articles from 2002 on the increase from 61 to 62 senate districts.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01...

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06...

---

by: GOP_RIP @ Tue Sep 28, 2010 at 02:07:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I would imagine (0.00 / 0)

it will be one from somewhere north of New York City and one in Long Island.  I find it hard to believe they could cut a City seat out where the city has grown.  The point above is true that there's not a lot of seats in Western New York to do this but I assume they'll play with the geography to make it work.

---

by: BingChester @ Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 19:26:43 PM UTC

I tend to think that (0.00 / 0)

NY will only lose one seat in the end. That could change, of course, if they add a seat for DC...

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 22:02:05 PM UTC

Based on the July 1, 2009 Cenus figures (0.00 / 0)

the northern 50 counties have lost about 55,000 residents while the lower 12 counties have added 550,000 residents. Thus, 2 senate districts will head south.

If the Republicans win the senate, they will likely try to add a 63rd district to spare the loss of two. I would expect a heavily minority senate district on Long Island as Democrats now have more enrolled voters and a few of the senate districts are marginal (Johnson, Hannon, Foley).

Unlike the legislative districts that can be drawn plus or minus 5% from the average district size, the congressional districts have to be exactly the same population.

Example:

If the 07/2009 Census estimate for NYS population is used (19,541,453) and is divided by 28 districts, the average CD size will grow by 43,550 per district. If NY loses two districts, the average CD size grows by 69,357 per district.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/q...  

---

by: GOP_RIP @ Tue Sep 28, 2010 at 02:20:53 AM UTC

The Lee and King seats (0.00 / 0)

Lets force Peter to run against Gillibrand in 2012 and split those two seats among all their surrounding (mostly Democratic neighbors. We can pack most of the Lee Reps into NY 29 so our new delegation will be 26 D and 1 R.

---

by: politics64 @ Thu Sep 30, 2010 at 00:53:06 AM UTC