The 2010 Census will bring reapportionment the the electoral map and US house. The new numbers will an impact on the 2012 elections.

Texas gains the most seats (4) followed by Florida (2). Washington, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Georgia, and South Carolina (1).

Ohio and New York lost the most seats (-2), followed by Michigan, Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, Louisianna, Pennsylvania, Massechusetts, and New Jersey (-1).

All other states remained the same.

Five of the eight states that are gaining seats were won by McCain in the 2008 presidential race. Eight of the 10 that are losing seats went to Obama.

Minnesota just made the cut for the last seat (No. 435), and will keep all eight of its districts, while North Carolina fell about 15,000 people short of gaining a 14th seat.

Republicans, whose 2010 gains make them dominant in the upcoming round of drawing new district lines, will control the redistricting process in eight of the states mentioned above, while Democrats control it in just two. That's important, because states that lose or gain seats generally see the biggest changes.

With Republicans in control in key states the redistriction process will be quite interesting.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/mapping-the-future/red-states-gain-as-new-congres.html

Yeah, it will be interesting to see how Ohio divides up the losses. If I was to guess, looking at the Congressional maps, I'm guess they will come from the Northeast.

Looking at that map Charlie Wilson might have been the most incompetent Congressman ever, that was a totally gerrymandered 6th district. There is nothing in common with Ironton and the Mahoning Valley other than good HS football - if you can't win with a heavily unionized population center and a huge college (Ohio U) with a mostly DEM leading workforce you almost need to pull an OJ Simpson.

That's a really terrible district though because there is nothing in common with Ironton and the Mahoning Valley. Who drew that up?

"If I was to guess, looking at the Congressional maps, I'm guess they will come from the Northeast. "

That is exactly what will happen. 10-11-13-14-16-17 will be shrunk by at least one and mostly two. Have no idea what they'll do with the MV.

I Wear Pants;609273 wrote:That's a really terrible district though because there is nothing in common with Ironton and the Mahoning Valley. Who drew that up?

The Democrats, and Ted Strickland should know, he was the Congressman for a big part of the area. They thought the MV population would offset the heavily GOP voter base of Meigs/Gallia/Lawrence. Problem was probably threefold (i) crap economy in the MV and voter disgust - a union person out of work is still out of work, (ii) Strickland won the SE because he was a very moderate -if not conservative (Pro-life) DEM in an evangelical region, and (iii) to my point above, Wilson's buffoonery.

Since Republicans will control how the new districts are drawn -- I'll go out on a limb and guess the two seats will come from historically Democrat areas.

Manhattan Buckeye;609270 wrote:Looking at that map Charlie Wilson might have been the most incompetent Congressman ever, that was a totally gerrymandered 6th district. There is nothing in common with Ironton and the Mahoning Valley other than good HS football - if you can't win with a heavily unionized population center and a huge college (Ohio U) with a mostly DEM leading workforce you almost need to pull an OJ Simpson.

I Wear Pants;609273 wrote:That's a really terrible district though because there is nothing in common with Ironton and the Mahoning Valley. Who drew that up?

Manhattan Buckeye;609288 wrote:The Democrats, and Ted Strickland should know, he was the Congressman for a big part of the area. They thought the MV population would offset the heavily GOP voter base of Meigs/Gallia/Lawrence. Problem was probably threefold (i) crap economy in the MV and voter disgust - a union person out of work is still out of work, (ii) Strickland won the SE because he was a very moderate -if not conservative (Pro-life) DEM in an evangelical region, and (iii) to my point above, Wilson's buffoonery.

Amen, Amen and Amen!

There was ALOT of people here in the Ohio Valley that were just fed up with low/no competence and shenanigans. They voted the suckers (Strickland and Wilson) out because of repulsion, frustrations and angst.

MB nailed it - buffoonery.

Looks like people may be fleeing states with higher taxes...

growth tends to be stronger where taxes are lower. Seven of the nine states that do not levy an income tax grew faster than the national average. The other two, South Dakota and New Hampshire, had the fastest growth in their regions, the Midwest and New England
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2010/12/census-fast-growth-states-no-income-tax#ixzz18rIHtTfh

majorspark;609987 wrote:Looks like people may be fleeing states with higher taxes...

growth tends to be stronger where taxes are lower. Seven of the nine states that do not levy an income tax grew faster than the national average. The other two, South Dakota and New Hampshire, had the fastest growth in their regions, the Midwest and New England
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2010/12/census-fast-growth-states-no-income-tax#ixzz18rIHtTfh

Shocking!!! It can't be true. Looks like the feds will need to get involved to make sure all states are equal in their taxing policies. Can't have states with different rights. All must be the same.

On a different note, I learned this morning that by Ohio's Constitution, each district must have the exact same number of people in it. This helps explain why the districts are so irregularly shaped and cut across geographical areas that cause confusion. I suppose I understand the logic, as no district can be deemed "more important" than another, but it creates odd bedfellows. I agree the NE Ohio regions are in jeopardy of losing 2 seats....just look at who won the statehouse last month.

Actually, DC grew to over 600,000 people, which has massive higher taxes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/21/AR2010122102609.html?hpid=newswell

ptown_trojans_1;610180 wrote:Actually, DC grew to over 600,000 people, which has massive higher taxes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/21/AR2010122102609.html?hpid=newswell

Wonder how many people of the "new growth" are special interest people? lol

CenterBHSFan;610185 wrote:Wonder how many people of the "new growth" are special interest people? lol

Little, most of those people are in Bethsda, MD or Northern Va.
Most of the growth seems to be young people or middle income 20-30 somethings.

Gravitating around the center of power to feed at the nation's trough.

majorspark;610195 wrote:Gravitating around the center of power to feed at the nation's trough.

Sort of. As I have mentioned, most of that is due to the massive growth of miltiary contractors in the past 10 years based in Northern Va.
Dulles and that whole area is flushed with contractors, both on intelligence and miltiary contractors.

Manhattan Buckeye;609288 wrote:The Democrats, and Ted Strickland should know, he was the Congressman for a big part of the area. They thought the MV population would offset the heavily GOP voter base of Meigs/Gallia/Lawrence. Problem was probably threefold (i) crap economy in the MV and voter disgust - a union person out of work is still out of work, (ii) Strickland won the SE because he was a very moderate -if not conservative (Pro-life) DEM in an evangelical region, and (iii) to my point above, Wilson's buffoonery.

Actually the R's drew that district up (They controlled everything in the early 2000's - Taft was governor and they had both houses). I don't know what they were thinking when they did it, but the D's still managed to lose it.

Ted's original 6th district was focused more on southeast/southern Ohio (the 18th covered all of the area along the Ohio River between Steubenville and Marietta), then they completely relocated it in 2000. My guess is they were basing it off the fact that the rural areas down there are REALLY conservative, and would make it swing back over. For multi-county items like Ohio Senate and whatnot, usually the rural votes of Athens and surrounding counties often more than offset the OU vote, and R's get elected. It finally worked that way due to pissed of union workers, just took the entire decade. Also, some of it in 2000 was probably a squeeze play on Traficant, as it screwed up his district horribly.

majorspark;609987 wrote:Looks like people may be fleeing states with higher taxes...

growth tends to be stronger where taxes are lower. Seven of the nine states that do not levy an income tax grew faster than the national average. The other two, South Dakota and New Hampshire, had the fastest growth in their regions, the Midwest and New England
http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2010/12/census-fast-growth-states-no-income-tax#ixzz18rIHtTfh

This is not surprising, and it's a point that I made several years ago when we were debating taxes on the Huddle. I think what exacerbates the effects is that those who are the wealthiest and are most hit by higher taxes tend to be those who have the most mobility and ability to relocate. In other words, if a state has higher taxes, it doesn't affect the McD's worker much. But it does affect the Bill Gates, etc. sort of guys. And it doesn't take too many of those guys leaving your state to have an impact.

I could see someday moving to Florida. But there's no way in hell I'd shave my head, pierce my nipples and get tats like fab... but I'd sure as hell party with him!

majorspark;610195 wrote:Gravitating around the center of power to feed at the nation's trough.

Mostly military and intelligence contractors in certain parts of Virginia, from what i can tell.