Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Chico makes millions lobbying city hall - No danger for Burnett? - Berrios rapped again
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* Illinois lost out on holding onto 19 congressional seats by just 75,046 residents, according to Election Data Services. Our population increased, just not enough. Illinois hasn’t gained a seat in Congress since 1910. The West and the South have been picking up seats for the past 70 years…
“The trend is growth in seats for western and southern states, and a tendency to lose seats in the Midwest and Northeastern states. In fact, since 1940 there’s been a net shift of 79 seats to the South and West,” said Robert Groves, director of the Census Bureau.
So, while it sucks that we’re losing a congressional seat due to reapportionment, and while we certainly have more than our share of problems here, the Chicago Tribune editorial today was just downright breathlessly negative…
The loss of a congressional seat is a barometer of many things. But most of all it is a barometer of people making decisions — about themselves, their children and the kind of future that Illinois promises.
Would you come to a state that makes national headlines not only for the size of its estimated $15 billion deficit this fiscal year, but also for its political leaders’ inability to dig in and reform how they spend?
Would you come to a state where thousands of kids are doomed to dead-end classrooms, where bright school reforms struggle and the dim status quo often prevails?
Where public corruption investigations provide one of the few employment growth industries? Where too many people around the world now think of Illinois as the chronically corrupt Land of Blago?
Where some $130 billion in unfunded obligations for public employees’ retirement benefits may — unless lawmakers come to their senses — condemn taxpayers and their progeny to decades of tomorrows spent retiring today’s debt from yesterday’s commitments?
Actually, we are gaining population. People are moving here. Yeah, we’re screwed up, but considering how close we came to keeping 19 seats, and considering the historical trends, losing one seat isn’t some Greek tragedy of epic proportions. We lost a seat in 1950 and again in 1960, when we were still pretty darned strong. Back in those days, we had worker shortages all over the place, yet we still lost seats.
Again, losing a seat in Congress is unacceptable. We should definitely use this as a learning, humbling experience. But we lost seats when we were still hitting on all cylinders as well. The Tribune ought to look at a little history to put things into perspective before screaming bloody murder again.
* Meanwhile, MALDEF made some interesting points about population growth via press release yesterday…
· The 2010 Census showed the nation grew 9.7% since 2000. Based on the Census Bureau’s 2009 ACS 1-Year Estimates, the Latino population grew 37% from 2000 to 2009, where the non-Latino White population grew less than 3%. Stated otherwise, Latinos made up 51% of the United States total population growth, compared to non-Latino White population contributing 21% of the U.S. total population growth.
· Based on the ACS data, in the following 16 states Latino population growth accounted for more than 60% of the state’s total population growth: California, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, and West Virginia. Latino population growth represents more than half the state’s population growth in 21 states.
In the eight states that gained Congressional Districts under the 2010 Census, the 2009 ACS data show that, with the exception of Florida and Texas, the Latino population grew more than 55%. In Texas and Florida, the Latino population grew a respective 37.16% and 48.82%. These relatively lower percentages represent large figures, with the states growing by 2,478,390 and 1,309,582 Latinos respectively. [Emphasis added.]
*** UPDATE *** From the Latino Policy Forum…
Illinois will be down a seat in the House of Representatives following the 2012 elections, according to yesterday’s US Census Bureau announcement. Analysis from the Latino Policy Forum indicates that two seats would have been stripped from Illinois, had the state’s Latino population not grown as dramatically as it has over the past decade.
“Latinos have made significant, well-documented contributions to the workforce and economy,” said Sylvia Puente, executive director of the Latino Policy Forum. “But beyond economics, Census data show how Latinos’ sheer numbers are benefiting Illinois.”
Without a Latino population increase of nearly half a million people since 2000, Illinois would have fallen short of the population needed for an 18th House seat, having sufficient population for just 17 seats. This shortfall is estimated at 315,656 to 368,937 people, according to analysis from the Latino Policy Forum.
Based on total apportionment population, each House seat represents 716,767 people, meaning that Illinois’ current 18-seat apportionment requires a population of 12,793,806. But without the Latino growth, Illinois population would have come in at an estimated 12,424,869, good for only 17 House seats.
* Related…
* Democrats in charge of drawing map: How can Illinois be gaining population and still be losing a seat in the U.S. House? The simple answer is that Illinois’ population did not grow enough during the past 10 years compared with other states.
* Illinois loses congressional seat: If the census shows a big Hispanic population increase in Illinois — and if that growth is not scattered across the state —Illinois Democrats may be under pressure to create a second Hispanic district. The first Hispanic district in Illinois was drawn following the 1990 census — a convoluted “C”-shaped district that includes Hispanic neighborhoods on Chicago’s North and South Sides wrapped around a district running from the lakefront to the near western suburbs.
* Remap war begins as census figures roll out: While detailed intrastate population breakdowns won’t be available for at least a few weeks, insiders are suggesting that the figures may well indicate that Chicago and Cook County no longer have enough African-Americans to sustain three super-majority black districts but enough Latinos to force creation of a second majority-Latino district.
* Illinois loses seat in U.S. House: Privately, some Democrats and Republicans agree that potential scenarios could involve merging parts of Schilling’s district with those of the 18th central Illinois district of Republican U.S. Rep. Aaron Schock of Peoria and the northwestern Illinois 16th District of U.S. Rep. Donald Manzullo of Leaf River. Schilling, of Colona, lives about 65 miles away from both Schock and from Manzullo, making it easier for mapmakers to set up potential head-to-head matches in a largely rural part of the state. Still, closer to Chicago, elements of Manzullo’s district also could be combined with the North Shore 10th District of Dold and 8th District of Walsh.
* Illinois gains population, but loses a congressman - Costello, Shimkus should be safe in redistricting: On the bubble, however, will be Schilling, a member of the GOP’s conservative Tea Party wing and one of four House freshmen elected last month. Schilling defeated Rep. Phil Hare, D-Rock Island. Cobbled together from other districts a decade ago during the last redistricting, Schilling’s 17th District — which stretches for north of Rock Island, hugs Illinois’ western border and reaches into sections of Madison, Sangamon and Macon counties — makes a logical target for the Democrat leaders to split up among other districts, including Shimkus’, Jackson said.
* How the states rank
* Illinois political parties map strategy: Illinois taxpayers could shell out as much as $3.4 million in the upcoming battle to redraw the state’s political boundaries.
* Teen birthrate at lowest point in seven decades
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 3:22 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Chico makes millions lobbying city hall - No danger for Burnett? - Berrios rapped again
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The Trib is grinding axes on unrelated topics here. People move states because they have a job to go to, and all the stuff the Trib mentions is not on a mover’s mind at all - it takes some time to take all of our bad points in.
I guess, though, if they are that worried about all of these things affecting our census count, perhaps they should stop reporting about pension debt, state budget deficits, bad schools, and political corruption. Seems like they are a big part of the problem.
Comment by Returning dog Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 8:14 am
Be careful Capt Fax— you just paid more attention to the Trib editorial page than their entire readership. We hear there is an opening. They may interpet your warmth as a bid for the seat. Just get the image of you, Bruce and JumpyJohn McC exchanging views.
Yikes
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 8:18 am
I suspect Tribune editorial writers ride in the occasional cab, go out to eat, gas up the car and pick up milk at the convenience store. Most of the folks running those businesses weren’t born in Wilmette or Stickney; they’re immigrants chasing the dream in Chicago.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 8:23 am
I’m just very glad that Bobby Schilling is a one termer. The guy has no clue.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 8:38 am
Ah, the waning influence of Illinois.
Beat chest. Wail. Lament. Gnash teeth. Repeat.
Memo to Tribune: Illinois has had a disproportionate influence in Washington. Like — forever.
Think Dennis Hastert. Bob Michel. Everett Dirksen. Don Rumsfeld.
(And how far back you wanna go? Joe Cannon? Grant? Douglas? Lincoln?)
Not only that. In today’s mash, mush, and muddle of miasma, myopia, and malaise, the Trib’s editorial board conveniently overlooks the outsized influence Illinois presently has in Washington.
Let’s see. We have senate whip Dick Durbin……..and cabinet secretaries Arne Duncan and Ray LaHood. Hello?
And then, of course……there are literally DOZENS of high profile Illinoisans…….all brought to Washington by that state-senator-turned-POTUS guy.
Uh-huh.
Pity Illinois. Not!
Comment by Dooley Dudright Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 8:39 am
Rich, I thnk there is a fine line between looking for the silver lining in some bad news and whistling past the graveyard. And that may be a critical distinction for those in charge of this state who are tinkering with the idea of increasing income taxes by 66% in the ver near future. To quote this morning’s Washington Examiner: “…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.”
Comment by GoldCoastconservative Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 9:09 am
GoldCoast,
Texas doesn’t have an income tax, but it has a Gross Receipts Tax. Maybe that’s the answer.
Nevada doesn’t have an income tax but it has lots of gambling. Maybe that’s the answer.
Florida doesn’t have an income tax but it has warm weather year round, Disney World and oceans. Maybe that’s the answer.
Comment by piling on Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 9:25 am
Did you have to clean the snow off your car this morning? Did you have to clean off your car yesterday? Did you have to put on boots, gloves, a sweatshirt, a jacket and hat to take out the garbage the other day? Are your nice shoes covered in grey slush and dried salt?
Well the places who got an increase in their congressional delegations aren’t answering yes to those questions. They’re at the pool today.
Comment by Scooby Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 9:30 am
Piling On, Washington doesn’t exatly have a reputation for tropical weather but still managed to grow fast enough to snag an additioal seat. Adn what about snowy South dakota. If Illinois’ population had grown at the same rate as SoDak’s, we wouldn’t be losing a seat.
Comment by GoldCoastConservative Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 9:33 am
Downstate GOP Congressmen have been able to dominate the last two downstate maps, even when democrats controlled the map making…i.e…Last time Dems sold-out David Phelps. However, now that Ray LaHood is working for Obama, perhaps Sen. Durbin will grow some hair and demand that Peoria county democrats get a shot at being represented. It’s a no brainer to take Sen. Koehler’s 60% + district and fold it into the current 17th District and then cut out Quincy and Adams County south.
Comment by Louis Howe Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 9:47 am
LH,
Adams County really does deserve a Republican Congressman, and Peoria Dems really deserve representation too.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 9:54 am
The states that gained a seat have nicer weather, lower taxes and no unions.
Comment by Doug Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 9:55 am
Math is hard. Clearly. South Dakota increased by about 60,000 people. South Dakota is still ranked 48th in Population density. Illinois is 14th.
It doesn’t take much more than middle school math to figure out that states with the densest populations are going to increase population at a slower percentage than states that are not dense.
Of course, Illinois gained 410,000 people.
Of the densest states this time around only Florida gained representation. This isn’t too hard to understand in that like many processes, rapid increases slow down after reaching a point of saturation. Then again, nearly all of the densely populated states have higher tax burdens because of infrastructure needs.
Comment by archpundit Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 9:55 am
===Illinois hasn’t gained a seat in Congress since 1910
Not only that, but Illinois’ population has more than doubled in that period of time and yet it has lost 1/3 of it’s Congressional delegation.
Comment by archpundit Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:00 am
Anon…You’re right…Adams County deserves to get a full dose of GOP representation.
Comment by Louis Howe Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:00 am
If Correlation = Causation, wouldn’t it make much more sense to blame the fact that Illinois hasn’t added a Congressional seat since 1910 on the Cubs?
They seem to be the one constant factor.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:01 am
Washington has a Gross Receipts Tax.
As for S. Dakota. Hey I love the Bad Lands as much as the next guy. But South Dakota does not have a Gold Coast. I’ll leave it at that.
Comment by piling on Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:03 am
Piling on,
But you’re forgetting Wall Drug. How can we compete with Wall Drug?
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:08 am
@Doug -
The two biggest drivers of population changes are birth rates (inversely related to educational attainment and income), and international migration (overseas immigrants tend to have higher birth rates as well).
So, if our only goal is to increase Congressional representation, we should ban birth control, cease education girls, and open our state to immigration.
@arch-pundit
Excellent analysis of the complexities of demographic shifts. I still blame the Cubs, because, like the Tribune EdBoard, I look for over-simplistic answers.
@Louis Howe - You can blame that as much on Lipinski and Costello as anyone else. However, if the GOP is to cut a deal, They might try to save Schock based on seniority alone. Statehouse Democrats also have an interest in keeping him in D.C. That said, Illinois is a Blue State, and it doesn’t take a statistics degree to create a Congressional delegation with a Democratic majority.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:10 am
I’m with YDD. And by extension, doesn’t that make our losing a congressional seat the Tribs fault as well? I knew it!
Comment by Juice Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:13 am
In 2000 there was a Republican Gov who was in the news recently too hence the incumbent protection deal. The democrats won the drawing for the legislature.
We dont know the details of where population changes occured but I suspect downstate will lose more than just one district. This time the pressure will come to maximize Dem numbers not save incumbents.
I will predict 5 Republicans go.
Nationally should be very interesting with those Latino numbers because the DOJ gets a say in Texas and I think Florida.
Comment by western illinois Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:26 am
Some food for though in today’s NY Times:
–40% of the decade’s growth was due to immigration.
–But population gains in the South and West were driven overwhelmingly by members of minorities, particularly Hispanics.–
–In Texas, for example, more than 85 percent of the population growth has been minority, according to Kenneth Johnson, a demographer at the University of New Hampshire.–
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/22/us/22census.html?_r=1&ref=us
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:31 am
The I heart springfield koolaid that is passed around here sometimes is amazing considering how bad things are in Illinois. The tribune is exactly right, the state was badly managed and governed the last decade and now the residents will pay for it all over again and for the next 10 years minus one bobby schilling or randy hultgren. While it won’t happen city democrats which botched the first 10 years of this decade should atone for their sins by forfeiting one of their seats.
Comment by Shore Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:41 am
- So, if our only goal is to increase Congressional representation, we should ban birth control, cease education girls, and open our state to immigration. -
Isn’t that the Catholic Church plan?
Comment by Small Town Liberal Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:57 am
That is stunning Wordslinger. That means Texas is majority minority and all of their new seats should be Hispanic. I should note that Texas does have Hispanic Republicans but will the DOJ be able to force Texas to have half minority districts?
As to downstate ,minus metro east, our population is close to Iowa and that would mean just 4 districts.
Is the Tribune still in business?
Comment by western illinois Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 10:59 am
Some states are growing at a faster rate than Illinois is. What’s the big deal about that? Less populated will almost always grow at a faster rate than more populated.
As long as there is a non-growing number of House seats, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc will do well to not lose a seat every census, and those seats will go to places like Florida, Texas, California. At least on this issue, the fault doesn’t appear to me to be with Illinois.
Comment by steve schnorf Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 11:02 am
Anon….I assume when you say “Wall Drug” you mean Mike McClain. I hope the Speaker still remembers that Mike cut a deal to draw his own district in 1980 and then promptly lost in 1982. I am sure he’s an excellent lobbyist, but his political instincts are lousy for downstate democrats.
Comment by Louis Howe Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 11:09 am
I read the Tribune editorial and I can’t say I completely disagree with it nor will I join in ridiculing it here.
We are 42nd in population growth? Woo Hoo! Let’s add it to some of the other numbers and rankings with other states that we continually gloss over.
We seem to end up in the bottom half and bottom quarter of such rankings way too often. As Vernon Dent used to say to the Three Stooges, “Gentlemen, what is the meaning of all this?”
I honestly believe the public wants to see a serious push at fixing the serious multiple problems this state has. Those still fixated on who is going to screw who in a remap process and in political power games might want to try to wise up a bit.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 11:24 am
To be honest, my politics/beliefs are more in line with the states that posted gains than with many of our own delegation. I’d rather see those states have more influence nationally to counterbalance certain of our homegrown reps.
No crying about losing a seat here.
Comment by Ken in Aurora Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 11:24 am
LH,
No, I meant Wall Drug (http://www.walldrug.com/)
It is the reason that South Dakota is better than Illinois. If you have ever been to South Dakota, you know what I mean.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 11:27 am
the bottom line is that for all the love for team madigan, team pat quinn, team dan hynes, team durbin, team daley, team obama, team cullerton and team democrat here, not once during their generation of serving in power has the state gained relative to the rest of the country. People are leaving liberal illinois to go to bush’s conservative texas, conservative north carolina and other areas.
our leaders don’t have the answers.
Comment by Shore Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 11:38 am
The only thing I remember about Wall Drug is a huge dinosaur and mineral water. Yes the signs started miles and miles away for this amazing site!
Comment by cermak_rd Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 11:40 am
Growth in much of the rapid growing areas of the country is simply unsustainable. It will take some time, but long term drought in the west, rising ocean levels along the coasts, further financial perils, etc. will turn the tide. We need to be thinking about how we can build a sustainable and quality way of living for the returning masses sometime down the road. Right now we live largely unsustainable lives ourselves. And quality, at least of the environmental and aesthetic kind, is not much in evidence.
Comment by vole Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 11:43 am
The easiest way to cure the problem of states losing Congressional (House) seats despite gaining in population would be to increase the number of House seats… the magic number of 435 has been in place for about 100 years if I remember correctly, but it isn’t cast in Constitutional stone. Perhaps the feds could set a specific population size or size range for every Congressional district - 750K to 1M would be appropriate. Any state that gains that many or more residents in a decade picks up another Congressional seat, without having to take it away from another state.
Comment by Secret Square Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 12:14 pm
I look forward to getting the whole census shebang so we can see exactly where the population grew and what the demographics were. If one of Texas’ new seats can be attributed to growth of the non-citizen population (legal and illegal), perhaps they will want to give it back. It’s ironic that the conservatives who spent a lot of time and effort opposing the counting of non-citizens are likely to benefit from all those extra folks.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 12:21 pm
If Dems are clever, they could get rid of Walsh, Dold, and Schilling all at once via map drawing!
Comment by formerpolitico Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 12:56 pm
“People are leaving liberal illinois to go to bush’s conservative texas, conservative north carolina and other areas.”
Did you read any of the info above, or just decide to comment? Illinois ADDED population.
Whatever. Enjoy Bob Dold’s one term in the House.
Comment by Bill F. Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 1:30 pm
just for perspective — again, no beef with South Dakota, love me that Black Hills gold — Illinois’ population gain, in sheer numbers, is roughly half the population of the entire state of South Dakota.
DuPage County has more people living in it than all of South Dakota.
Just for perspective.
Comment by piling on Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 2:06 pm
You know who is losing numbers?
The Tribune.
Sheesh, they must have no clout if Illinois is adding hundreds of thousands of residents but their circulation is dropping.
Too bad.
Comment by piling on Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 3:00 pm
–Really bad weather,ugly landscape and no tax base(or dwindling)–
Ugly landscape? That’s below the fold. There are many, many beautiful areas in the state. Pere Marquette wrote in his diary that the Illinois River Valley was the most beautiful part of his excellent adventure.
I guess, in your mind, we’re being penalized for feeding the world with all of our corn and bean fields? The Grand Canyon and Monument Valley are beautiful, but they can’t feed themselves there.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 3:02 pm
===Ugly landscape? That’s below the fold.===
That’s why I deleted it. Sheesh.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 3:04 pm
===Ugly landscape? That’s below the fold.===
Actually, southern Illinois is below the fold, and it’s gorgeous; unfortunately, you can’t eat the scenery.
Frankly, the places that are growing the fastest are growing beyond the ability of the landscape in which they live to support them. Even our slow growth is beginning to reach the limits of our water resources. Growth isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 3:38 pm
“I’m just very glad that Bobby Schilling is a one termer. The guy has no clue.”
Phil Hare lost because he spent too much time at MENSA meetings to campaign properly.
Comment by T.J. Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 4:22 pm
===People are leaving liberal illinois to go to bush’s conservative texas, conservative north carolina and other areas.
No. Try again. Illinois gained over 400,000 people in the last decade. Additionally, Illinois is already more dense than Texas and North Carolina. For anyone who bothers to look at the data, only one state as dense as Illinois gained seats—Florida.
And to repeat, since 1910 which was the benchmark used in the story–we have over doubled the population of Illinois and lost 1/3 of our seats.
The only way to spin this as a great indictment of something or another hobby horse is if you are numerically illiterate. This explains the Chicago Tribune editorial board perfectly.
Comment by archpundit Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 4:31 pm
Remember when it comes to drawing the districts only voting age population is used. With the high birth rate over the last decade a large portion of the Latino population growth won’t be used in drawing the new districts. I still believe that a second Latino district is possible. It will be interesting to see how it is drawn as Latinos are becoming more dispersed as the second, third generations move away from the city.
Comment by Fed up Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 5:14 pm
all tea party and sarah palin endorsed extremists electect this round (hultgren, schilling, walsh, kinzinger) will have to go, however district boundaries are shuffled. we need more people in the center, not far right or far left.
Comment by From 14 Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 6:57 pm
So if you want to eliminate extremists from both sides, do you also want to see Jan Schakowsky, Mike Quigley, Luis Gutierrez and Danny Davis defeated?
Comment by to from 14 Wednesday, Dec 22, 10 @ 8:54 pm