Missouri will likely lose a House seat according to a new estimate based on 2010 Census data. The loss will significantly affect Missouri’s overall impact on national issues; the state would will lose an electoral college vote, for instance, and each district would will be somewhat larger, permitting less representative granularity. The most immediate impact, however, would will be the shape of Missouri’s House delegation. The process of reapportionment should be especially interesting given that Missouri has a Democratic governor and a Republican controlled legislature, a situation that is likely to persist for awhile at least.
In April, Nathaniel90 at the Swing State Project offered a speculative map showing how Missouri’s political environment, coupled with the loss of a House seat, might affect reapportionment. I found myself, as a current resident in Rep. Akin’s 2nd district, very interested the first point he made:
The real question for me was which districts to combine. With power balanced between the parties, it was obvious that one Republican and one Democrat had to face off in a “fair fight” district, leading to an obvious solution: a suburban St. Louis seat forcing Todd Akin (R) and Russ Carnahan (D) together. […] the legislature won’t draw anything too friendly for Carnahan’s south-of-the-city base, and that Gov. Nixon would balk at a map too heavy in Akin’s northern suburbs.
Were this to happen, it could give us at least some chance of finally getting rid of the egregious embarrassment that is Todd Akin. It also puts Carnahan’s Democratic seat at risk (assuming that Carnahan holds it this November), but it might be worth it. I am one of the few who believes that if the Missouri Democratic party had been willing to put more energy into Akin’s district over the past few years, he would be a lot more vulnerable right now, even without redistricting. A new competitive district might be just the ticket.
The second biggie that Nathaniel90 struggled with is the outlook for Ike Skelton’s rather strange 4th district:
The other problem in Missouri was what to do with Ike Skelton’s (D) heavily Republican district spanning the rural areas between Kansas City and Columbia. I figured that a bipartisan plan means incumbent protection, and the Democrats know Skelton will be 81 when the 113th Congress convenes and is not far from retirement. I thus drew a swing district stretching from the close-in Kansas City suburbs to college town Columbia that would not only easily reelect Skelton, but provide a future Dem with a decent shot at holding the 4th District.
Nathaniel90’s final conclusion about the best of all possible outcomes (note the emphasis on “possible”):
So there would be four safe Republican seats, two safe Democratic seats, and two swing seats (one of them safe for an incumbent Democrat as long as he chooses to run). Believe it or not, this is probably the closest thing to a Dem-friendly map one could get from today’s Missouri legislature.
I don’t have the experience or background with Missouri’s political map that would allow me to comment knowledgeably about the overall state picture. Does anyone think the situation will roll out differently?
DRA is located here: http://gardow.com/davebradlee/…
with an estimate of 5911605 for the 2010 population, the current districts split as follows (it’s not totally precise due to precinct lines and such)
1: 623513
2: 670222
3: 637954
4: 656244
5: 643959
6: 667298
7: 701196
8: 638112
9: 673107
An 8 district plan would have the ideal district population of 738951.
And you can guess as to why the 1st and 8th will not get sliced up.
So let’s slice up the 3rd and give the title of 3rd district to NE Missouri. And after some other cuts, here’s what I produced.
The 6th turns into a travel nightmare. Absorbs most of the NE 9th. Gives up Boonville to the 4th. Gives up SW Clay County (Northern KCMO) to the 5th.
The 5th takes the entire county and some of Northern KC.
The 4th still looks weird. It can’t give up much of the Southern part since the 7th is growing fast. Giving Rolla to the 4th was a late decision. The reason for not putting Miller County in the 4th is Luetkemeyer’s house and the reality that the 2012 map is going to be drawn by a judge and should be pretty mild.
The 3rd is the Southern Half of the 9th, with some of the Northern part of the 8th, and most of the 2nd which was north of the Missouri. I’m sure Luetmeyer wouldn’t weep if he lost Boone County but got most of the Southeastern part of the 4th, and really, that’d be a lot better for having a 4-4 split map someday.
The 7th picks up some ultraRepublican areas and some more of Polk. The 8th probably slightly cancels out the gain of Jefferson/Ste. Gen by dropping Washington County.
And here’s a closeup of St. Louis with this map.
The portion in St. Charles is parts of St. Charles MO and St. Peters MO. The 1st picks up University City, Clayton, Brentwood, Richmond Heights, and parts of Central STL. And despite what some outside the state think, I don’t think there’s a requirement for the 1st to be majority African-American, but it’s 49/45 in this map.
In a more partisan map, I could move the most Republican wards in STL to the 1st and some more Dem wards moving to the 1st on this map (8, 15, 23) could be in the 2nd. But once again, it will either take a huge defection of Dems or a federal Judge to draw this map.