data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0b2c5/0b2c56de5d67c5d7ebad07c243198e5faf1b5474" alt=""
She raised a daughter who happens to see the big picture implications of the elections, and not just the "Save the Democratic Congressional majority" one that's all too familiar to us.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d1536/d1536db2348797c1ada91b7245dc30c0a9a32605" alt=""
The initial population figures are being released to the states and the various municipalities in December 2010. That data will determine how many congressional districts a state loses or gains, and that will be in effect for the rest of the decade.
The states projected to gain seats:
1. Texas - (+4) (Current delegation: 32)
2. Florida - (+1) (Current delegation: 25)
3. Georgia - (+1) (Current delegation: 13)
4. Washington - (+1) (Current delegation: 9)
5. Arizona - (+1) (Current delegation: 8)
6. South Carolina - (+1) (Current delegation: 6)
7. Nevada - (+1) (Current delegation: 3)
8. Utah - (+1) (Current delegation: 3)
These states are projected to lose seats:
1. Illinois - (-1) (current delegation 19)
2. Iowa - (-1) (current delegation 5)
3. Louisiana - (-1) (current delegation 7)
4. Massachusetts - (-1) (current delegation 10)
5. Michigan - (-1) (current delegation 15)
6. Minnesota - (-1) (current delegation 8)
7. New Jersey - (-1) (current delegation 13)
8. New York - (-1) (current delegation 29)
9. Pennsylvania - (-1) (current delegation 19)
10. Ohio- (-2) (current delegation 18)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/097fd/097fd65ee2ac465402ed321dc69db8cc4f463965" alt=""
We're anticipating in Houston the data will officially push us over the 2 million mark in population, which triggers a clause in our code of ordinances that expands our city council by two seats.
Okay, so why is all of this important from a BTLG point of view?
Unless you live in Iowa, in which the redistricting is handled by a non partisan panel, whichever party in your locality controls your state legislature (or city council, etcetera) will control the redistricting process. The way they draw those boundaries can either help, hinder or neuter the prospects for additional GLBT community political representation gains.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7ce91/7ce916aa34a3e2895a3dd3f96014e97fc43a6068" alt=""
When the 2003 Delaymandering happened in Texas, liberal bastion Austin was split between 4 separate congressional districts. The six white Democratic congressmembers at the time were suddenly facing districts that were redrawn to be more conservative. Blue Dog Rep. Ralph Hall switched parties as a result. When the Dems regained control of Congress in 2006 that map probably kept six Texas seats out of Democratic hands.
They also redrew the Texas legislature map to produce a 120-30 Republican supermajority, but thank God it's 77--73 GOP for now. The loss of the Dem majority paved the way for the anti gay marriage amendment that fouls our state constitution now.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d14c1/d14c1f0b70f41c60c47bc40ed5da243a75d12e43" alt=""
But there are other issues your ballot will decide besides the long tern implications of redistricting. We have trans candidates running potentially historic races for office in Oklahoma, Maryland and California who could use your help and votes.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9c690/9c6903c4610f4dec7a89fefe109e8da6e73e8be4" alt=""
Congressional candidates are generally members of large city councils, state legislators and judges. We have to start consistently winning those races to be considered for the next phase of the political game. Annise Parker's route to the Houston mayor's chair started by winning an at large city council seat in 1997.
So yes, there's a lot at stake in the November 2 elections, and it's not just the Democratic congressional majority. Our political fortunes over the next decade are at stake as well.
Crossposted from the Bilerico Project