2010 Reapportionment Projection

[muon2]

Another estimate using the same 2003 census data is at
http://www.polidata.org/census/bensen_dc05.pdf

It projects the population growth in a similar fashion, then uses the actual apportionment method. That method starts by assigning each state 1 representative seat. The next seat goes to the largest state and its population is then divided by two. Each additional seat goes to the largest state population divided by the number of seats already assigned. When all 435 seats have been assigned, reapportionment is complete.

By the analysis cited above:

Gainers:
TX +3
CA +2
FL +2
NV +1
UT +1
AZ +1
GA +1

Losers:
NY -2
OH -2
MA -1
PA -1
IL -1
MN -1
IA -1
MO -1
LA -1

[muon2]

opebo for once we agree.

Muon-- it looks like they used the 01-03 data instead of the 00-03 data, but the results were almost exactly identical. The only difference was the switch between AL and MN... MN though is growing at a good rate and I think less likely to lose than AL, which is being passed by by GA and TN.

I ran the data myself with the base at 4/1/2000 and the estimates from 7/1/2003. That is technically a 3.25 year period. I then applied the official equal proportions method (it uses the geometric mean of the impact of current and next seat). I get the same as my earlier post except that Al loses instead of MN, so you are probably correct.