ARTICLE
California Loses One Congressional District News out of Washington, D.C. this week spells a new era for California. The 2020 Census count was released. Before we jump into the current census, let’s take a look at how, historically, politics played a significant role in the map-making process. The once-in-a-decade census brings about a revitalization of partisan politics as each state redesigns its congressional and state legislative boundaries. Before Californians voted to establish a California Citizens Redistricting Commission in 2008, the majority party for the California congressional delegation and the state legislature controlled the district map-making process. When former Governor Earl Warren mandated one man, one vote by deciding Reynolds v. Sims, the California Senate was badly malapportioned by counties, with the 6 million people in Los Angeles County and the 397 people in Alpine County each represented by one state senator. In 1966 Governor Pat Brown signed a bipartisan gerrymander bill that state senators had designed to retain as many incumbents as constitutionally possible. The legislature attempted further incumbency protection after the 1970 census, so Governor Ronald Reagan vetoed the bill. With the legislature and governor unable to resolve the impasse, the California Supreme Court ultimately appointed special masters to draw new districts. After the 1980 census, California became entitled to 45 congressional districts, a growth of two. Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature and the governorship but were feeling vulnerable after former Governor Reagan had won California by a landslide in the 1980 presidential election. Democratic Congressman Phillip Burton and new State Assembly Speaker Willie Brown devised a redistricting plan that would result in five new safe Democratic seats. Congressman Burton would boast that the bizarrely shaped map, which included a 385-sided district, was "My contribution to modern art.” Reacting to what was called "one of the most notorious gerrymanders'' of the decade, Republicans successfully placed a veto referendum on the primary ballot and California voters overwhelmingly rejected the legislature's redistricting plans in the June 1982 election, the same election that enacted the California Constitution's Victims Bill of Rights. A majority of the California Supreme Court justices, however, had been appointed by Governor Jerry Brown, and a sharply fractured court ordered the rejected districts to be used in the November election because only it was "practicable." Democrats won 60% of the congressional seats despite only taking 49.9% of the statewide vote. Democrats still lost the statewide elections, losing the governorship, and incumbent Governor Jerry Brown losing his U.S. Senate bid to San Diego Mayor Pete Wilson. Governor Brown responded by calling an extraordinary legislative session, amending a previously passed bill with the redistricting plan that had just been rejected by the electorate, and signing the redistricting plan into law hours before being replaced by Republican George Deukmejian. Where we are now — California, for decades a symbol of boundless growth and opportunity that attracted people from across the country and around the world — has seen its population growth stall. The state is losing a U.S.House of Representatives seat for the first time in our 170-year history. This was anticipated news as experts were seeing a slow growth trend for the past decade. California had marginal growth since the last 2010 census at about 6.1%, but that was the lowest growth rate in our history. Karen Battle, chief of the Census Bureau’s Population Division, said, “California has experienced a natural increase in population since the last count in 2010, meaning there were more births than deaths. There was also positive net international migration, but negative net domestic migration, meaning more people moving to other states than moving in contributed to the population count,” Battle said. Experts summarized the reasons for California’s slower growth rate. Birth rates have steadily fallen in California since the aftermath of WWII when the baby boom sent the state’s population soaring. The younger generations are waiting longer to begin families. The average age of the first births in California rose from 28 in 2010 to 31 in 2019. California’s baby boomers have aged out. In addition to lower birth rates, higher death rates have contributed to the slower population growth for our state. And the cost of living, especially housing costs, is an issue pushing an out-migration to other states. According to data from 2017, 1.7% of California’s population moved out of state, and 1.3% moved into California. Again, in 2019, 1.7% moved out of California and only 1.0% moved in. Immigration policy — the percentage of new immigrants into California — slowed remarkably. As an example, reviewing state data from the State Finance Department, immigration accounted for between 0.4% and 0.5% of California’s population increase from 2010-2015. However, starting in 2017, immigration declined significantly to less than 0.1% last year. Conducted once every 10 years, the count determines, among other things, how many of the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives each state gets. With a larger population than any other state at 39,576,757 people, according to the latest data, California will continue to have more seats than any other state. But the California Congressional delegation will shrink from 53 to 52. These states are the “population winners and population losers.'' Joining California, New York, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and West Virginia also lost a congressional seat. Texas will gain two seats; North Carolina, Florida, Oregon, Montana and Colorado will pick up one seat. According to Claremont McKenna College political professor, Jack Pitney, he believes the loss of a congressional seat for California is a “psychological blow and it shifts some power of the House of Representatives towards Republican leaning states.” Pitney concluded, “In a very close election, this could make a difference, but it isn’t a huge surprise.” For California, the dynamics may also shift. The projections for the census release suggest that the Bay Area may see a slight boost in numbers but at this time, there is no official city-level population count to determine final census numbers. One possibility is whether San Jose has lost its ranking as the 10th largest city in the country to Austin, Texas. It is too early to tell what California legislative districts will look like since the Census Bureau won’t release more detailed data for several months. It will be up to the 2020 California Citizens Redistricting Commission to redraw the state’s political boundaries to reflect population changes. One thing is for certain, if all the current members of the California Congressional delegation want to be re-elected, someone is going to lose a seat. Here’s what to expect. The commission currently is hosting educational presentations about the redistricting process in California. Starting in June, the commission is expected to organize public input meetings. Drafts of district maps will be released between November and December of this year. Final district maps are due to California’s Secretary of State by February 2022. It’s unclear whether district maps will be finalized as candidates file to run for office in February for the June 2022 primary election. So what does this mean for Santa Cruz County? Newly drawn districts will change the demographics (and possible voting blocks) for state assembly and state senate districts as well as the two congressional districts that represent Santa Cruz County. It will shift the boundaries of the five supervisors’ districts based on where the population growth within the county has taken place since the last census. It will be an interesting summer and fall — we are battling the pandemic, awaiting a dry summer and wildfire season, Governor Newsom is facing a recall election, the public facing work of the Citizens Redistricting Commission, and the behind-the-scenes political levers being pulled to either maintain control of the legislature and the congress or see it slip into the minority party’s hands. Stay tuned.
California Loses One Congressional District
News out of Washington, D.C. this week spells a new era for California. The 2020 Census count was released. Before we jump into the current census, let’s take a look at how, historically, politics played a significant role in the map-making process.
The once-in-a-decade census brings about a revitalization of partisan politics as each state redesigns its congressional and state legislative boundaries. Before Californians voted to establish a California Citizens Redistricting Commission in 2008, the majority party for the California congressional delegation and the state legislature controlled the district map-making process.
When former Governor Earl Warren mandated one man, one vote by deciding Reynolds v. Sims, the California Senate was badly malapportioned by counties, with the 6 million people in Los Angeles County and the 397 people in Alpine County each represented by one state senator. In 1966 Governor Pat Brown signed a bipartisan gerrymander bill that state senators had designed to retain as many incumbents as constitutionally possible. The legislature attempted further incumbency protection after the 1970 census, so Governor Ronald Reagan vetoed the bill. With the legislature and governor unable to resolve the impasse, the California Supreme Court ultimately appointed special masters to draw new districts.
After the 1980 census, California became entitled to 45 congressional districts, a growth of two. Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature and the governorship but were feeling vulnerable after former Governor Reagan had won California by a landslide in the 1980 presidential election. Democratic Congressman Phillip Burton and new State Assembly Speaker Willie Brown devised a redistricting plan that would result in five new safe Democratic seats. Congressman Burton would boast that the bizarrely shaped map, which included a 385-sided district, was "My contribution to modern art.” Reacting to what was called "one of the most notorious gerrymanders'' of the decade, Republicans successfully placed a veto referendum on the primary ballot and California voters overwhelmingly rejected the legislature's redistricting plans in the June 1982 election, the same election that enacted the California Constitution's Victims Bill of Rights.
A majority of the California Supreme Court justices, however, had been appointed by Governor Jerry Brown, and a sharply fractured court ordered the rejected districts to be used in the November election because only it was "practicable." Democrats won 60% of the congressional seats despite only taking 49.9% of the statewide vote. Democrats still lost the statewide elections, losing the governorship, and incumbent Governor Jerry Brown losing his U.S. Senate bid to San Diego Mayor Pete Wilson. Governor Brown responded by calling an extraordinary legislative session, amending a previously passed bill with the redistricting plan that had just been rejected by the electorate, and signing the redistricting plan into law hours before being replaced by Republican George Deukmejian.
Where we are now — California, for decades a symbol of boundless growth and opportunity that attracted people from across the country and around the world — has seen its population growth stall. The state is losing a U.S.House of Representatives seat for the first time in our 170-year history. This was anticipated news as experts were seeing a slow growth trend for the past decade. California had marginal growth since the last 2010 census at about 6.1%, but that was the lowest growth rate in our history.
Karen Battle, chief of the Census Bureau’s Population Division, said, “California has experienced a natural increase in population since the last count in 2010, meaning there were more births than deaths. There was also positive net international migration, but negative net domestic migration, meaning more people moving to other states than moving in contributed to the population count,” Battle said.
Experts summarized the reasons for California’s slower growth rate. Birth rates have steadily fallen in California since the aftermath of WWII when the baby boom sent the state’s population soaring. The younger generations are waiting longer to begin families. The average age of the first births in California rose from 28 in 2010 to 31 in 2019.
California’s baby boomers have aged out. In addition to lower birth rates, higher death rates have contributed to the slower population growth for our state. And the cost of living, especially housing costs, is an issue pushing an out-migration to other states. According to data from 2017, 1.7% of California’s population moved out of state, and 1.3% moved into California. Again, in 2019, 1.7% moved out of California and only 1.0% moved in.
Immigration policy — the percentage of new immigrants into California — slowed remarkably. As an example, reviewing state data from the State Finance Department, immigration accounted for between 0.4% and 0.5% of California’s population increase from 2010-2015. However, starting in 2017, immigration declined significantly to less than 0.1% last year.
Conducted once every 10 years, the count determines, among other things, how many of the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives each state gets. With a larger population than any other state at 39,576,757 people, according to the latest data, California will continue to have more seats than any other state. But the California Congressional delegation will shrink from 53 to 52.
These states are the “population winners and population losers.'' Joining California, New York, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and West Virginia also lost a congressional seat. Texas will gain two seats; North Carolina, Florida, Oregon, Montana and Colorado will pick up one seat.
According to Claremont McKenna College political professor, Jack Pitney, he believes the loss of a congressional seat for California is a “psychological blow and it shifts some power of the House of Representatives towards Republican leaning states.” Pitney concluded, “In a very close election, this could make a difference, but it isn’t a huge surprise.”
For California, the dynamics may also shift. The projections for the census release suggest that the Bay Area may see a slight boost in numbers but at this time, there is no official city-level population count to determine final census numbers. One possibility is whether San Jose has lost its ranking as the 10th largest city in the country to Austin, Texas.
It is too early to tell what California legislative districts will look like since the Census Bureau won’t release more detailed data for several months. It will be up to the 2020 California Citizens Redistricting Commission to redraw the state’s political boundaries to reflect population changes. One thing is for certain, if all the current members of the California Congressional delegation want to be re-elected, someone is going to lose a seat.
Here’s what to expect. The commission currently is hosting educational presentations about the redistricting process in California. Starting in June, the commission is expected to organize public input meetings.
Drafts of district maps will be released between November and December of this year. Final district maps are due to California’s Secretary of State by February 2022. It’s unclear whether district maps will be finalized as candidates file to run for office in February for the June 2022 primary election.
So what does this mean for Santa Cruz County? Newly drawn districts will change the demographics (and possible voting blocks) for state assembly and state senate districts as well as the two congressional districts that represent Santa Cruz County. It will shift the boundaries of the five supervisors’ districts based on where the population growth within the county has taken place since the last census.
It will be an interesting summer and fall — we are battling the pandemic, awaiting a dry summer and wildfire season, Governor Newsom is facing a recall election, the public facing work of the Citizens Redistricting Commission, and the behind-the-scenes political levers being pulled to either maintain control of the legislature and the congress or see it slip into the minority party’s hands. Stay tuned.