It’s reapportionment time. And Minnesota – which held onto its eighth US House seat just about the lowest possible margin ten years ago – finally stands to lose a Representative.
California and New York appear to be in line to lose 2 or 3 seats apiece, with Florida and Texas the big winners so far, by all appearances.
But what’ll happen in Minnesota?
You can wager money that “combining the 4th and 5th CDs” won’t be on the table. Don’t even bother.
To my mind, it looks a little like this:\
- The 4th and 5th are sacrosanct. They’re not going anywhere.
- The 1st, 7th and 8th are associated with large, socially and geographically distinct areas.
But the 2nd, 3rd and 6th are all mixed bags. Now, I don’t think there’s much case to be made to dissolve the 6th, much as the DFL would love to send Tom Emmer back to private practice.
But getting consolidating either the 2nd or 3rd, and expanding the neithboring districts to fill in the gap, makes a lot of sense.
Thoughts?
the 4th and 5th will geographically shrink slightly
the 7th and 8th will get slightly larger geographically
the 1st will nibble Wabasha off the 2nd
the 2nd and 6th will likely gobble up the 3rd
They probably can’t flip the 6th, so my guess is they will try to buttress the 2nd with as many lefty enclaves from the 3rd as possible, and the 3rd will go away, as Pig suggests above.
Not realistic but I’d like to combine Omar and McCollum’s districts inside 494/694 beltway into the George Floyd district, distribute the remainder to nearest geographic districts, and pass the popcorn.
Minnesota needs to face the music that other parts of the country are growing in population faster than here.
The politicians should be taken out of the boundary drawing process. Many states have now gone to an independent commission (often with judges and technical specialists) that draw the legislative boundaries. But this is not only about the congressional districts. They (whomever it finally involves) must also redraw each of the 67 state senate and 134 state house districts. And all local districts must also be attended to. And all of this needs to be done before the next election cycle.
Golf – the numbers make sense. There are enough people in the current inner cities and first-ring burbs to pretty much make up a CD.
But the civil rights lawsuit over cutting the urban core’s representation in half would be epic.
What we’ve currently got with the urban-centered districts is a classic gerrymander–make sure that the looney left gets their representatives, no matter how badly it s***ws the rest of us. Tell me exactly why the right of the suburbs to have representation doesn’t matter again?
762k is the likely population per CD for the next 10 years so 316k for St Paul + 437k from Minneapolis + half of West St Paul would round out a Congressional District nicely – too bad it won’t happen — it would be fun to watch heads explode in Mac-Groveland at the thought of being represented by Omar.
Happy to see my intuition born out by the population numbers. Mitch, of course the lawsuits would be epic. Still, a boy can dream.
Really, shouldn’t a district be composed of people who are to a degree similar? And don’t people who choose/must live in the big cities have something in common, and a difference between themselves and the suburbs?
Why not make districts more homogeneous? It might even reduce the amount of campaign spending as people realize that the likely range of views of electable politicians is not that great. Plus, the fistfights on legislative floors would be great.
The very idea of geographic districts is divisive.
The people of any congressional district shouldn’t view their interests as being any different from any other district.