The 2010 census will have an obvious effect on congressional politics as districts are created, eliminated, and redrawn, but a story receiving far less attention is its impact on presidential electoral politics, as states gain and surrender electoral votes due to this reapportionment of districts. The consistent western migration, particularly to states along the Sun Belt, will undoubtedly change the Electoral College map and could alter presidential election strategy, which has remained relatively consistent over the years.
An analysis of the recent census data reveals that Texas (4), Florida (1), Utah (1), Nevada (1) and Arizona (1) will gain votes. Other scenarios suggest that Georgia or Oregon might gain votes at the expense of one in Texas. States likely to lose congressional districts are Ohio (2), Illinois (1), New York (1), Michigan (1), Pennsylvania (1), Massachusetts (1), and either New Jersey (1), Louisiana (1) or Iowa (1). Overall, it appears that the Democrats will sustain a six-seat erosion attributable to population shifts.
Some might ask, “why does this matter?” The erosion of electoral votes in traditionally Democratic states might require the Democrats to pickup an additional, traditionally Republican state, to win a close presidential election. The 2000 election provides an interesting example, because though the focus of controversy was rightly placed on Florida, the unexpected loss of New Hampshire was equally important. Under the current the congressional allocations, a win in New Hampshire would have given Vice President Gore the presidency. However, if the expected reapportionment changes are applied, Gore would have fallen short of 270 electoral votes regardless of the outcome in New Hampshire.
President Obama won 365 electoral votes in 2008, but the expected reallocation would reduce that number to 359. Clearly, the Obama victory margin makes reapportionment less influential, but in a competitive election, Indiana (11), Virginia (13), North Carolina (15) and Florida (27) would be in jeopardy. Should a Republican carry these states, Obama’s cushion is only 23 electoral votes.
Among the next group of toss-up states, a Republican would capture the White House, by winning Ohio (19 additional electoral votes), and only one state from the following group of targets: Wisconsin (10), Colorado (9), Iowa (7) and of course, Michigan, which could prove to be unpredictable in the future. Should the Republican candidate win Ohio plus New Hampshire, another possibility, it would reduce Obama’s number to the minimum, 270, setting up the potential for Electoral College controversy.
Clearly the current population shifts in the country will have a profound effect on coming presidential races, not to mention congressional elections.