Census Bureau Announces New Population Estimates

The U.S. Census Bureau finally released its long-awaited population estimates from the 2020 Census on Monday. According to the Census Bureau, as of 2020, the U.S. population was estimated to be 331,449,281, an increase of about 22.7 million or 7.4 percent from 2010, when the previous census was taken. The bureau has also announced which states will gain or lose seats in the House (and thus the Electoral College), so let’s take a deeper dive.

Texas is the largest winner of this census, gaining two House seats, while Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon will each gain one House seat as well. The states of California, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia will each lose one House seat. This means a new round of redistricting ahead of the 2022 midterms with the new data.

The number of electoral votes (each state gets two more electoral votes than the amount of representatives it sends to the U.S. House) along with how the state voted in the 2020 presidential election is shown in the following diagram.

These House seat and Electoral College numbers will remain for the next 10 years through to the next census in 2030 (censuses are taken every 10 years by the Census Bureau). It also means that the 2024 and 2028 presidential elections will be held under this map.

It is crucial to note that just because a state has lost an electoral vote, it does not mean that the state has lost population. In fact, only three states — West Virginia, Illinois, and Mississippi — lost any population at all in the last 10 years. (West Virginia lost 59,278 people, or 3.7 percent of its population, Illinois lost 18,124 people, or 0.1 percent of its population, and Mississippi lost 6,018 people, an insignificant decrease). All other states gained in population — California, despite losing one electoral vote, still gained over 2.28 million people, a 6.3 percent increase in population, while New York, which also lost an electoral vote, gained 823,147 people, a 4.3 percent increase. These states lost representation because they gained at a rate slower than the national rate.

The demographic changes are also evident from this Census — more and more people are fleeing the “frost belt” of the Midwest (especially Appalachia) and Northeast and moving down to the Sun Belt and Western states.

New York was just 89 people away from averting a seat loss. Had the census counted 89 more people in New York, Minnesota would have lost a House seat rather than New York.

These numbers are somewhat different from our expectations. Expectations, which were based on the population estimates from the Census Bureau last year, indicated states such as Arizona gaining an extra electoral vote, with Minnesota and Rhode Island potentially losing one and New York potentially losing a maximum of two electoral votes. Both of Rhode Island’s representatives can breathe a sigh of relief as none of their district will be changing at all.

The new numbers mark an end to California being the largest and fastest-growing state in the country. It went from having just 30 seats in the 1950s to maxing out at 53 after the 2000 census. It gained no more seats in 2010 and finally lost a seat this year.

Though from raw numbers alone the Democrats have clearly lost in electoral vote count (on this map, Joe Biden would have only won 303, rather than 306, electoral maps in the 2020 election), it isn’t totally bad news for the party. In fact, while it may benefit the Republicans in the short run, it looks good for the Democrats in the long run.

Two Democratic states which gained electoral votes include Oregon and Colorado, while Texas, Florida, and North Carolina, states in the Sun Belt which all gained electoral representation, are all fast-growing swing states which are getting bluer and bluer. (Texas, which has somewhat of a reputation as being a Republican stronghold, went from voting for George W. Bush by well over a 20 percent margin in 2000 and 2004 to voting for Donald Trump by just over five percent in 2020). The only real safe-red state which gained a vote was Montana, but that doesn’t mean that both its new districts will be red — the state has an independent commission responsible for drawing up new districts, and many of Montana’s population centers vote Democratic.

Also, despite safe blue states such as New York and Illinois decreasing in representation, the seats lost here will likely be Republican seats, since partisan legislatures responsible for drawing up new districts will ensure that a Republican loses his or her House seat and potentially make the maps in these states even more favorable for the Democrats. The two states, which are the two largest blue states where an independent commission is not responsible for drawing up legislative districts, are Democrats’ biggest redistricting weapons this cycle to combat Republican gerrymanders.

In total, Democratic state legislatures will have the authority to draw 75 congressional districts while Republicans will have the authority to draw 187 districts, with 121 districts being drawn by independent commissions and 46 districts where split control will mean that parties will have to work together to draw up new legislative districts. (Five states — Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Delaware — have just one at-large district, so no redistricting will be necessary in those states.)

New York, Ohio, Iowa, and Utah, which use independent commissions to draw up districts, allow the partisan legislature to have final control and veto power over the commission, so it is quite likely that these commissions will draw maps in favor of the party in control anyway.

Even if a state uses a independent commission to redraw legislative districts, it doesn’t necessarily mean all the districts will be competitive. For instance, California, despite using an independent commission, still only has very few competitive and Republican House seats, so oftentimes commissions, which can get quite partisan in many states, do not maximize the number of competitive districts.

In other states, like North Carolina, where Republicans have full control over the redistricting process (the governor, who is Democratic, lacks the power to veto district maps), Democrats have had past history of getting the courts to overturn overly partisan and gerrymandered maps, and precedent in many competitive states could allow Democrats could sue in court to get maps drawn more fairly. (For instance, courts in North Carolina ordered a new map, with two safe Democratic districts, to be used in the 2020 elections there.)

A partisan battle over gerrymandering is about to begin, so make sure to stay tuned for more updates. As legislatures get more and more partisan, they are sure to draw districts to favor their own parties, which is a bad thing for democracy. Fair, competitive districts will ensure parties will have to fight for certain districts and make elections much fairer for both parties.