We've got three more states' worth of Census data dump to look at today, and instead of a random collection today, it's thematically consistent: the three medium-size light-blue states of the west. First off the bat is Colorado, which stays at seven seats; its target population is 718,457, up from an average of about 615K in 2000. (Remember, the "deviation" is how many seats the district will need to gain or shed in order to conform, not a raw number reflecting loss or gain. You can calculate raw gain/loss by working off the 2000 target, if you're curious.)
District
Population
Deviation
CO-01
662,039
(56,418)
CO-02
733,805
15,348
CO-03
706,186
(12,271)
CO-04
725,041
6,584
CO-05
725,902
7,445
CO-06
797,813
79,356
CO-07
678,410
(40,047)
Total:
5,029,196
The redistricting solution here seems pretty simple: CO-01 (Denver proper) and CO-07 (Denver's northern suburbs) will need to shift southward to accommodate the large growth in CO-06 (Denver's southern suburbs), while the rest of the state stayed pretty stable. Interestingly, despite CO-07 lagging the state growth-wise, the state's strongest Hispanic growth was in CO-07, which since 2000 went from 20% to 28% Hispanic.
Oregon stays at five seats, having just barely missed the cut for #6. Its target population is a beefy 766,215, up from about 684K in 2000.
District
Population
Deviation
OR-01
802,570
36,355
OR-02
769,987
3,772
OR-03
762,155
(4,060)
OR-04
739,234
(26,981)
OR-05
757,128
(9,087)
Total:
3,831,074
Several Oregon districts are going to have to shift north, where the state's growth was centered in Portland's western suburbs in OR-01. The smallest gains happened in OR-04, which is Eugene and the economically-hard-hit timber country to its south. OR-05, which is sandwiched between the 1st and 4th in the mid-Valley also needs to pick up population; the 5th is the state's most Hispanic district, going from 10% to 15% Hispanic since 2000.
Finally, here's Washington, which barely made the cut, and got its tenth seat. Its target is 672,454, up from 655K in 2010. (Interestingly, if you divided Washington by 9, you'd wind up with a lower target than Oregon, at 747,171. There's a lot more to the reapportionment formula than that sort of purely mechanical calculation, of course, but that ought to raise a few eyebrows in Oregon.)
District
Population
Deviation
WA-01
739,455
67,001
WA-02
760,041
87,587
WA-03
779,348
106,894
WA-04
774,409
101,955
WA-05
723,609
51,155
WA-06
709,570
37,116
WA-07
704,225
31,771
WA-08
810,754
138,300
WA-09
723,129
50,675
Total:
6,724,540
The two main nodes of growth in Washington are WA-08 (Seattle's eastern suburbs) and WA-03 (Vancouver, which is really Portland's northern suburbs). However, there was almost as much growth in WA-04, east of the Cascades, which means that any new configuration is going to have two-and-a-half districts east of the Cascades, with (unlike now) one district traversing the mountains. The 4th is also by far the most Hispanic district in the state, growing from 27% to 34% Hispanic since 2000. One other interesting tidbit: in three of the state's nine districts (1st, 7th, and 8th, all in the Seattle area) the largest non-white group isn't African-Americans or Hispanics, but rather Asians.
Finally, did you know that Census 2010 data, via American FactFinder, is available not only at the congressional district level, but also the legislative district level? Because a) I'm a Washingtonian, and b) I'm a nerd (and c), it's not that big a project, since Washington doesn't have separate Senate and House districts), I thought I'd also include Washington broken down by LD, in case you want a finer-grained sort on the state's population gain. The number of districts will stay at 49, so the new target is 137,236.
District
Population
Deviation
LD-01
147,265
10,029
LD-02
163,707
26,471
LD-03
120,601
(16,635)
LD-04
141,254
4,018
LD-05
161,403
24,167
LD-06
141,123
3,887
LD-07
130,475
(6,761)
LD-08
149,474
12,238
LD-09
136,166
(1,070)
LD-10
134,117
(3,119)
LD-11
134,027
(3,209)
LD-12
132,531
(4,705)
LD-13
143,750
6,514
LD-14
130,478
(6,758)
LD-15
132,788
(4,448)
LD-16
154,830
17,594
LD-17
150,727
13,491
LD-18
160,083
22,847
LD-19
126,904
(10,332)
LD-20
141,029
3,793
LD-21
133,156
(4,080)
LD-22
141,695
4,459
LD-23
130,119
(7,117)
LD-24
132,679
(4,557)
LD-25
145,035
7,799
LD-26
133,755
(3,481)
LD-27
123,857
(13,379)
LD-28
119,494
(17,742)
LD-29
127,259
(9,977)
LD-30
129,998
(7,238)
LD-31
137,685
449
LD-32
122,038
(15,198)
LD-33
129,246
(7,990)
LD-34
125,055
(12,181)
LD-35
138,142
906
LD-36
133,901
(3,335)
LD-37
127,546
(9,690)
LD-38
129,624
(7,612)
LD-39
143,154
5,918
LD-40
138,925
1,689
LD-41
142,722
5,486
LD-42
146,619
9,383
LD-43
133,976
(3,260)
LD-44
156,499
19,263
LD-45
136,432
(804)
LD-46
127,849
(9,387)
LD-47
140,146
2,910
LD-48
130,423
(6,813)
LD-49
134,779
(2,457)
Total:
6,724,540
What's that you say? You don't have the Washington legislative district map committed to memory? And yet you call yourself a Swingnut? Well, here it is. The largest growth came in LDs 2 (eastern Pierce Co.) and 5 (eastern King Co.), which are the most exurban parts of WA-08, as well as 44 (eastern Snohomish Co.: exurban WA-02), and 18 (northern Clark Co.: exurban WA-03). The slowest growth was in LDs 3 (downtown Spokane), 28 (Lakewood and Fort Lewis, south of Tacoma), 32 (Shoreline and Edmonds, north of Seattle), 27 (downtown Tacoma), and 34 (West Seattle). (If you're wondering what the lean of these districts is, we've got that, too.)
