Congressional Districts - 2016 ACS estimates.

[jimrtex]

These are the Census estimated population based on 2016, 1 year estimates. These are the sum of 12 monthly surveys, and thus correspond roughly to July 2016, assuming linear change throughout a year.

The largest districts (10% greater than national averages of 741K)

AL Montana         1043  Montana
AL Delaware         952  Delaware
22 Texas            881  Houston SW suburbs.
AL South Dakota     865  South Dakota
1 Idaho             865  Boise to Panhandle
12 North Carolina   849  Charlotte
4 North Carolina    847  Raleigh
26 Texas            845  Denton
3 Texas             843  Collin
3 Oregon            835  Portland
9 Florida           833  Orlando, Kissimmee
31 Texas            831  Williamson+Bell
1 Oregon            831  Portland Metro West
10 Virginia         827  Washington Metro West
3 Iowa              824  Des Moines, Southwest Iowa
10 Texas            823  Austin to NW Harris
35 Texas            823  Austin to San Antonio (I-35)
5 Oregon            822  Salem, Portland Metro South, Northern Coast
2 North Carolina    820  Raleigh Metro
7 Arizona           818  Phoenix
2 Idaho             818  Boise to East
5 Oklahoma          816  OKC, Oklahoma Pottawatomie, Seminole counties

[Kamala]

What about the smallest?

[Nyvin]

What about the smallest?

Rhode Island's two districts for starters.

[Brittain33]

12 North Carolina   849  Charlotte
4 North Carolina    847  Raleigh

Pretty impressive to have two Democratic vote sinks also be the two fastest-growing districts in the state. Although I suppose the NC Leg had the 2015 or 2014 data in hand when they redistricted based on 2010 Census data so it's not a coincidence.

[Nyvin]

12 North Carolina   849  Charlotte
4 North Carolina    847  Raleigh

Pretty impressive to have to Democratic vote sinks also be the two fastest-growing districts in the state. Although I suppose the NC Leg had the 2015 or 2014 data in hand when they redistricted based on 2010 Census data so it's not a coincidence.

Yeah,  NC-4 and NC-2 are BOTH overpopulated, BOTH fast growing, NC-2 is BARELY Safe R anymore, NC will be gaining a seat in 2020 meaning all current seats will shrink in size...

...and somehow we're supposed to believe the Republicans can draw an 11-3 map for 2022.

[PragmaticPopulist]

12 North Carolina   849  Charlotte
4 North Carolina    847  Raleigh

Pretty impressive to have to Democratic vote sinks also be the two fastest-growing districts in the state. Although I suppose the NC Leg had the 2015 or 2014 data in hand when they redistricted based on 2010 Census data so it's not a coincidence.

Yeah,  NC-4 and NC-2 are BOTH overpopulated, BOTH fast growing, NC-2 is BARELY Safe R anymore, NC will be gaining a seat in 2020 meaning all current seats will shrink in size...

...and somehow we're supposed to believe the Republicans can draw an 11-3 map for 2022.

They'd have to make an absolute hackery of the congressional map to pull that off. I'd imagine if the supermajority is broken by the time redistricting comes around that some of NC-04 will be distributed to surrounding districts, possibly making NC-02 more competitive.

[KingSweden]

12 North Carolina   849  Charlotte
4 North Carolina    847  Raleigh

Pretty impressive to have to Democratic vote sinks also be the two fastest-growing districts in the state. Although I suppose the NC Leg had the 2015 or 2014 data in hand when they redistricted based on 2010 Census data so it's not a coincidence.

Yeah,  NC-4 and NC-2 are BOTH overpopulated, BOTH fast growing, NC-2 is BARELY Safe R anymore, NC will be gaining a seat in 2020 meaning all current seats will shrink in size...

...and somehow we're supposed to believe the Republicans can draw an 11-3 map for 2022.

They'd have to make an absolute hackery of the congressional map to pull that off. I'd imagine if the supermajority is broken by the time redistricting comes around that some of NC-04 will be distributed to surrounding districts, possibly making NC-02 more competitive.

The supermajority has no bearing on redistricting in NC

[krazen1211]

12 North Carolina   849  Charlotte
4 North Carolina    847  Raleigh

Pretty impressive to have to Democratic vote sinks also be the two fastest-growing districts in the state. Although I suppose the NC Leg had the 2015 or 2014 data in hand when they redistricted based on 2010 Census data so it's not a coincidence.

Yeah,  NC-4 and NC-2 are BOTH overpopulated, BOTH fast growing, NC-2 is BARELY Safe R anymore, NC will be gaining a seat in 2020 meaning all current seats will shrink in size...

...and somehow we're supposed to believe the Republicans can draw an 11-3 map for 2022.

They'd have to make an absolute hackery of the congressional map to pull that off. I'd imagine if the supermajority is broken by the time redistricting comes around that some of NC-04 will be distributed to surrounding districts, possibly making NC-02 more competitive.

The Democrat party made sure that the Governor of North Carolina could not veto redistricting maps. At the time, the Democratic legislative majority was worried about the possibility of a Republican governor vetoing the maps.

Beyond that, it is very easy to make an 11-3 North Carolina map. Simply remove the depopulating inner banks region from NC-01 and crack it between 3 districts.

[jimrtex]

What about the smallest?

These districts have less than 90% of the ideal population.

7 Alabama           666  Black Belt - Birmingham
2 New Hampshire     663  West, Connecticut Valley, Nashua, Concord
8 Minnesota         662  Northeast
2 Nebraska          661  Omaha
13 Michigan         658  Detroit, West and North Wayne
2 Maine             655  North
1 Nebraska          639  East, Lincoln
AL Vermont          625  Vermont
2 West Virginia     623  Middle, Charleston
1 West Virginia     617  Northern, Wheeling
3 Nebraska          607  West, Central
3 West Virginia     591  South, Huntington
AL Wyoming          586  Wyoming
1 Rhode Island      537  East
2 Rhode Island      520  West

[jimrtex]

These are projected to 2020 assuming a linear (not exponential) increase. For the 2010 base, I used the average population for the state, this will only make a trifling difference for West Virginia and Arkansas.  Districts 10% greater than ideal of 761K.

AL Montana         1074  Montana
22 Texas            991  Houston SW suburbs.
AL Delaware         985  Delaware
26 Texas            934  Denton
3 Texas             929  Collins
12 North Carolina   919  Charlotte
4 North Carolina    915  Raleigh
9 Florida           915  Orlando, Kississimee
1 Idaho             913  Boise to Panhandle
31 Texas            910  Williamson, Bell
10 Texas            898  Austin to NW Harris
35 Texas            897  Austin to San Antonio I-35
AL South Dakota     896  South Dakota
10 Virginia         887  Washington Metro West
7 Arizona           883  Phoenix
8 Texas             883  Montgomery and Northward
3 Oregon            876  Portland
2 North Carolina    872  Raleigh Metro
6 Colorado          871  Aurora, Centennial, Highland Ranch, Brighton
13 New York         870  Manhattan (Harlem)
1 Oregon            870  Portland Metro West
1 Colorado          869  Denver
21 Texas            868  Northern Bexar to Travis, Hill Country
16 Florida          868  Southern Hillsborough, Manatee (Bradenton), Sarasota
3 Iowa              862  Des Moines, Southwest Iowa
19 Florida          861  Lee, Collier (Cape Coral, Ft. Myers, Naples)
5 Oregon            856  Salem, Portland Metro South, Northern Coast
5 Oklahoma          855  OKC, Oklahoma, Pottawatomie, Seminole Counties
2 Colorado          854  Larimer, Boulder, North Jeffco
4 Utah              854  South Valley (West Jordan to Logan)
20 Florida          854  Palm Beach, Broward, Three Fingers
9 Texas             851  Southwest Houston
7 Georgia           849  Northeast Atlanta Metro (Norcross)
10 Florida          849  Western Orange (Orlando)
11 Virginia         848  Southwestern Washington Metro
42 California       847  Southwestern Riverside (Corona, Lake Elsinore, Murietta)
20 Texas            847  Central San Antonio
24 Texas            845  Northern Tarrant
26 Florida          844  Southern Miami-Dade, Florida Keys
3 Nevada            843  Southern Clark, Henderson
4 Colorado          842  Weld, Douglas, Eastern Plains
18 Texas            841  South, Northwest, Northeast Houston
5 New York          840  Queens (Jamaica)
2 Idaho             839  Idaho Boise to East

[jimrtex]

2020 Projections for districts 90% or less of national average.

4 Illinois          684  Chicago - Ear Muffs
2 Mississippi       684  West - Delta, Jackson
4 Alabama           684  North Central
1 Maine             683  South
12 Illinois         682  Southwest - St.Louis Metro East
2 Alabama           681  Southeast
9 Pennsylvania      680  Southwest
1 New Hampshire     680  East - Manchester, Portsmouth
10 Pennsylvania     679  North Central
1 Illinois          679  Chicago
17 Illinois         678  Northwest - Quad Cities
1 Minnesota         678  South
14 New York         676  Queens (Astoria) - Bronx (Southeast)
11 Ohio             675  Cleveland, Akron
16 Illinois         673  Chicagoland Fringe - Rockford
7 Minnesota         671  West
5 Michigan          666  Flint, Tri-Cities, Saginaw Bay
2 New Hampshire     666  West, Connecticut Valley, Concord, Nashua
8 Minnesota         662  Northeast
2 Georgia           660  Southwest, Albany
1 Nebraska          657  East, Lincoln
7 Alabama           655  Black Belt - Birmingham
2 Maine             650  North
13 Michigan         630  Detroit, North and West Wayne
2 West Virginia     626  Middle, Charleston
AL Vermont          624  Vermont
1 West Virginia     617  North, Wheeling
3 Nebraska          606  West, Central
AL Wyoming          599  Wyoming
3 West Virginia     575  South, Huntington
1 Rhode Island      543  East
2 Rhode Island      516  West

Noteworthy: NE-2 (Omaha) is on 2016 list, but not 2020. Nebraska is close to losing a third seat, and so dividing in three equal parts makes all three undersized, but Omaha is increasing faster than USA as whole. In fact, Omaha growth is causing state to grow faster (barely) than USA, and maintaining third seat.

New York (City) has both large districts (NY-13 and NY-5) and small (NY-14). NY-13 and NY-14 are adjacent.

Georgia also has large and small districts (GA-7 and GA-2).

[muon2]

With 5 of 18 IL CDs on jimrtex's list of the undersized, it's pretty clear why IL must lose at least one CD. The 5 include two minority CDs from Chicago, two CDs from outside Chicagoland, and 1 that skirts the exurbs into downstate. Three are solid D and two are R, but the R seats are at opposite ends of the state. If the loss is only one CD, as currently forecast, I can imagine wholesale changes as the Dems try to maintain the same representation for Chicago and force the loss on the Pubs.

[Nyvin]

With 5 of 18 IL CDs on jimrtex's list of the undersized, it's pretty clear why IL must lose at least one CD. The 5 include two minority CDs from Chicago, two CDs from outside Chicagoland, and 1 that skirts the exurbs into downstate. Three are solid D and two are R, but the R seats are at opposite ends of the state. If the loss is only one CD, as currently forecast, I can imagine wholesale changes as the Dems try to maintain the same representation for Chicago and force the loss on the Pubs.

Wouldn't it make the most sense to cut up IL-16 between the two (Chicago and non-Chicago) though? 

Most of it would go toward the west and south, but a small portion would obviously be needed in the Chicago area though.   

Most of the Chicago districts can just be equalized between each other, since there's both under and overpopulated districts.

[Oryxslayer]

With 5 of 18 IL CDs on jimrtex's list of the undersized, it's pretty clear why IL must lose at least one CD. The 5 include two minority CDs from Chicago, two CDs from outside Chicagoland, and 1 that skirts the exurbs into downstate. Three are solid D and two are R, but the R seats are at opposite ends of the state. If the loss is only one CD, as currently forecast, I can imagine wholesale changes as the Dems try to maintain the same representation for Chicago and force the loss on the Pubs.

If Dems have full control over redistricting, which requires Rauner to go or Madigan to gain a greater legislative control, I have always assumed the loss would be 12/13. With the 12th shrinking, it perfect sense for the Dems to cut one, and then combine the most Democratic bits to try to create another democratic seat. Some bits might be needed for 17th, but with Chicagoland marching leftward, it might just be easier to go grab some of the suburbs.

[muon2]

With 5 of 18 IL CDs on jimrtex's list of the undersized, it's pretty clear why IL must lose at least one CD. The 5 include two minority CDs from Chicago, two CDs from outside Chicagoland, and 1 that skirts the exurbs into downstate. Three are solid D and two are R, but the R seats are at opposite ends of the state. If the loss is only one CD, as currently forecast, I can imagine wholesale changes as the Dems try to maintain the same representation for Chicago and force the loss on the Pubs.

If Dems have full control over redistricting, which requires Rauner to go or Madigan to gain a greater legislative control, I have always assumed the loss would be 12/13. With the 12th shrinking, it perfect sense for the Dems to cut one, and then combine the most Democratic bits to try to create another democratic seat. Some bits might be needed for 17th, but with Chicagoland marching leftward, it might just be easier to go grab some of the suburbs.

The 17th is probably the biggest challenge for the Dems. They can either stick a finger into Springfield and Decatur like the 2001 map or run a finger down the river to E St Louis. Either way that takes a piece out of what they probably need to make a southern IL CD. The south has just been swinging so far R the last few cycles, that it becomes harder and harder to build a Dem district.

I do agree that they'd likely dismantle IL-16 and try to run fingers further out from Chicago in to the burbs. Keeping 3 black CDs will be their challenge in Chicago. The areas immediately south and west of the Loop in IL-7 have been gentrifying and losing black population. That population has been dispersing or leaving the state and that means it is hard to replace with the next tier of suburbs out from the city.

[Brittain33]

Surprised AZ-7 is the fastest growing district in the state.

[Nyvin]

With 5 of 18 IL CDs on jimrtex's list of the undersized, it's pretty clear why IL must lose at least one CD. The 5 include two minority CDs from Chicago, two CDs from outside Chicagoland, and 1 that skirts the exurbs into downstate. Three are solid D and two are R, but the R seats are at opposite ends of the state. If the loss is only one CD, as currently forecast, I can imagine wholesale changes as the Dems try to maintain the same representation for Chicago and force the loss on the Pubs.

If Dems have full control over redistricting, which requires Rauner to go or Madigan to gain a greater legislative control, I have always assumed the loss would be 12/13. With the 12th shrinking, it perfect sense for the Dems to cut one, and then combine the most Democratic bits to try to create another democratic seat. Some bits might be needed for 17th, but with Chicagoland marching leftward, it might just be easier to go grab some of the suburbs.

The 17th is probably the biggest challenge for the Dems. They can either stick a finger into Springfield and Decatur like the 2001 map or run a finger down the river to E St Louis. Either way that takes a piece out of what they probably need to make a southern IL CD. The south has just been swinging so far R the last few cycles, that it becomes harder and harder to build a Dem district.

I do agree that they'd likely dismantle IL-16 and try to run fingers further out from Chicago in to the burbs. Keeping 3 black CDs will be their challenge in Chicago. The areas immediately south and west of the Loop in IL-7 have been gentrifying and losing black population. That population has been dispersing or leaving the state and that means it is hard to replace with the next tier of suburbs out from the city.

Is it possible that Illinois will only be required to have 2 BVAP majority districts? 

[Brittain33]

Is it possible that Illinois will only be required to have 2 BVAP majority districts? 

The question is more whether the Democratic legislature would draw a map going down from 3 to 2.

[jimrtex]

These are the 2020 projections relative to the intrastate quota:

Maine

1 Maine             1.025  South
2 Maine             0.975  North

To equalize populations, about 17K persons will be shifted from South to North.

New Hampshire

1 New Hampshire     1.010  East - Manchester, Portsmouth
2 New Hampshire     0.990  West - Connecticut Valley, Concord, Nashua

To equalize population, about 7K persons need to be shifted.

Vermont

AL Vermont          1.000  Vermont

After 2020, VT-AL will be the second smallest district, after West Virginia and Rhode Island lose a district, and Nebraska rebalances its districts. Northern New England will be home to five of the six smallest districts in the country.

Massachusetts

1 Massachusetts     0.943  Berkshires, Connecticut Valley - Springfield
2 Massachusetts     0.984  Worcester - Worcester
3 Massachusetts     1.010  Far North Boston Metro - Fitchburg, Lowell, Lawrence
4 Massachusetts     0.992  West Boston Metro, Bristol - Taunton, Fall River
5 Massachusetts     1.005  Near North Boston Metro - Framingham
6 Massachusetts     1.020  Northeast Boston Metro - North Shore, Essex, Cape Anne
7 Massachusetts     1.046  Boston
8 Massachusetts     1.035  South Boston Metro - Taunton
9 Massachusetts     0.965  Plymouth, Cape Cod, Islands, Bristol - New Bedford

50K need to be shifted to MA-1 and MA-2, and 27K to MA-9. To equalize all districts requires a minimum of only 179K in shifts (about 2.6% of the state population), though I would go a bit farther. MA-1, MA-2, and MA-9 can be kept out of the Boston area, shifting MA-9 to include Fall River.

MA-4 can be pushed further east and MA-8 a bit south. The reduction to 9 districts greatly improved the Massachusetts map, and this would further undo the map that was drawn to gerrymander Margaret Heckler out of a district 40 years ago.

Rhode Island

1 Rhode Island      1.026  East
2 Rhode Island      0.974  West

About 14,000 persons would need to be shifted to equalize the districts, but instead they will be combined into a single at-large seat. Rhode Island will go from having the two smallest districts, to the second largest after Montana, and there is a possibility of Montana of gaining a seat.

Connecticut

1 Connecticut       0.994  North Central - Hartford
2 Connecticut       0.977  East - New London, Norwich
3 Connecticut       1.004  South Central  - New Haven
4 Connecticut       1.038  Southwest - Bridgeport, Norwalk, Stamford
5 Connecticut       0.987  Northwest - Waterbury, Torrington, New Britain, Danbury

To equalize all districts requires a shift of about 48K persons (1.3% of total population). It will be increasingly difficult to keep CT-2 from encroaching on Hartford and New Haven. There could also be some swaps to make the boundary between CT-1 and CT-5 more regular.

[muon2]

Is it possible that Illinois will only be required to have 2 BVAP majority districts? 

The question is more whether the Democratic legislature would draw a map going down from 3 to 2.

This is correct. IL probably wouldn't have been required to have 3 black VRA CDs in the current map if a 2-CD version was drawn. Politically that wasn't going to happen. The same thing was seen in the last state legislative map, where even though there was a decrease in the black population in Chicago enough for 2 house districts, the map was drawn so that there would be no decrease in seats that would be likely to be won by the candidate of choice of the black community.

[Young Conservative]

What district would be lost in Alabama?

[Brittain33]

What district would be lost in Alabama?

Assume with Republican control you have to have:

1. VRA district in Birmingham, Selma, and Montgomery (AL-7)
2. Mobile-based district (AL-1)
3. Suburban Birmingham district (AL-6)
4. Huntsville-based district (AL-5)

1st district has to expand east into the 2nd district.
5th district has to expand south into the 4th district.

AL-3 and AL-4 have the most senior Republicans who also happen to be too young to retire. If driven by personalities and the same people are in office in 2020, I imagine Martha Roby loses her seat with some bits going to the 1st (rural south) and 7th (Montgomery) and the rest merging with the 3rd.

An alternative is to divide up the 4th with the 5th taking a big chunk, the 6th getting rid of rural counties south of Shelby and going west, and the 3rd taking up the populous east of the district.

[muon2]

What district would be lost in Alabama?

Assume with Republican control you have to have:

1. VRA district in Birmingham, Selma, and Montgomery (AL-7)
2. Mobile-based district (AL-1)
3. Suburban Birmingham district (AL-6)
4. Huntsville-based district (AL-5)

1st district has to expand east into the 2nd district.
5th district has to expand south into the 4th district.

AL-3 and AL-4 have the most senior Republicans who also happen to be too young to retire. If driven by personalities and the same people are in office in 2020, I imagine Martha Roby loses her seat with some bits going to the 1st (rural south) and 7th (Montgomery) and the rest merging with the 3rd.

An alternative is to divide up the 4th with the 5th taking a big chunk, the 6th getting rid of rural counties south of Shelby and going west, and the 3rd taking up the populous east of the district.

This is what I posted in 2015 using whole counties except for Jefferson. I expect that a Pub gerry would add the city of Montgomery to the VRA CD and shift the other southern AL CDs to compensate. It chops up AL-3 between AL-2, 4 and 6. If there was an agreed retirement from one of the Pubs then that CD would get chopped instead.

[jimrtex]

Feel free to suggest alternative names.

New York

1 New York          0.972  Suffolk Central, East
2 New York          0.963  Suffolk-Nassau, South Shore
3 New York          1.003  Nassau-Suffolk, North Shore
4 New York          0.983  Nassau, South Shore
5 New York          1.136  Queens, Jamaica
6 New York          1.049  Queens, Flushing, Forest Hill
7 New York          1.070  Brooklyn, Williamsburg, Bushwick, Sunset Park
8 New York          1.087  Brooklyn, Bedford-Stuyvesant, East Flatbush, East New York
9 New York          1.016  Brooklyn, Kensington, Park Slope
10 New York         0.952  Manhattan-Brooklyn (Ugh), West Side, Borough Park
11 New York         1.009  Staten Island-Brooklyn, Staten Island, Bensonhurst
12 New York         0.966  Manhattan-Queens, East Side
13 New York         1.176  Manhattan, Harlem
14 New York         0.914  Queens-Bronx, Astoria
15 New York         1.081  Bronx, South and West
16 New York         1.012  Westchester-Bronx, Yonkers, Rye, North Bronx
17 New York         1.028  Westchester-Rockland, White Plains, Rockland
18 New York         0.981  Exurban New York, Newburgh, Poughkeepsie, Middletown
19 New York         0.928  Mid Hudson Valley
20 New York         0.983  Albany, Schenectady, Troy
21 New York         0.958  North Country, Plattsburgh, Jamestown
22 New York         0.940  Near West New York, Utica, Binghamton
23 New York         0.940  Southern Tier, Ithaca, Elmira, Jamestown
24 New York         0.948  Syracuse, Oswego
25 New York         0.978  Rochester
26 New York         0.952  Western New York, Buffalo Metro
27 New York         0.976  Buffalo

The ten districts in Upstate New York (NY-18 to NY-27) have a population equivalent to 9.541 districts, which would result in considerable sliding of districts to the east and south, as NY-18 would need to slide southward by about 308K persons, and the other districts in decreasing amounts.

The thirteen mostly insular districts (NY-1 to NY-12, and NY-14) have a population equivalent to 13.118 districts, which permits the districts to be largely maintained with source districts in Brooklyn and Queens (NY-5 to NY-8) flowing into districts fairly nearby (NY-1, NY-2, NY-4, NY-10, NY-12, and NY-14).

Four districts in between (NY-13 to NY-15, and NY-17) have a population equivalent to 4.298 districts, which provides most of the population that must flow upstate.

The minimum shift needed to equalize districts is 2.268M (about 11.8% of the state population). But this all presumes that New York will not lose a congressional district. This is increasingly unlikely as movement into city centers abates.

The following are relative to 26 districts (a loss of one).

1 New York          0.936
2 New York          0.927
3 New York          0.966
4 New York          0.946
5 New York          1.094
6 New York          1.010
7 New York          1.030
8 New York          1.047
9 New York          0.978
10 New York         0.916
11 New York         0.972
12 New York         0.930
13 New York         1.133
14 New York         0.880
15 New York         1.041
16 New York         0.974
17 New York         0.990
18 New York         0.945
19 New York         0.894
20 New York         0.947
21 New York         0.922
22 New York         0.905
23 New York         0.905
24 New York         0.913
25 New York         0.941
26 New York         0.917
27 New York         0.940

The twelve upstate districts (NY-17 to NY-28) have a population equivalent to 11.194 districts (based on 26 total), so that one district can be eliminated, and produce a modest surplus of about 148K to be shifted south.

Since all the districts are underpopulated, a least shift strategy would eliminate one in a more central location, and dividing its population outward among adjacent districts. A large multi-county district is preferred, since it can be divided, without cutting into a larger metropolitan area. NY-19, NY-21, and NY-22 are possibilities. NY-22 may be the best choice since it can be divided among NY-23 and NY-24, with further distributions westward, NY-21, and NY-19 with further distributions eastward. In addition, Utica and Binghamton are not large metropolitan areas.

NY-22 may be distributed among: NY-24 (and NY-25) 118K; NY-23 (and NY-26, NY-27) 177K; NY-21 (and NY-20) 101K; NY-19 (and points south) 300K. Because of the large share of the population shifted to NY-19, and alternate interpretation is that the two districts are merged, and the excess population distributed. If the intent was to pair incumbents, this might be more equitable.

The seven districts in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Staten Island (NY-7 to NY-13) have a population equivalent to 7.006 districts, which permits shifts within the area from the districts with a surplus (NY-7, NY-8, and  NY-13) to those with a deficit (NY-9 to NY-12). Only 178K (3.3%) need to be shifted to equalize the seven districts.

The four Long Island districts in Nassau and Suffolk have a population equivalent to 3.775 districts, or around 173K persons, the surplus from upstate (after the loss of a seat), NY-15, and NY-5 can be used to fill in these four districts and NY-14. NY-14 which currently has about 2/3 in Queens will become a majority Bronx district.

To equalize among 26 districts requires shifting 1.908M persons, about 9.6% of the state population. This counts the population that remains in the merged NY-19/22 as not being shifted.

[Oryxslayer]

New York

1 New York          0.972
2 New York          0.963
3 New York          1.003
4 New York          0.983
5 New York          1.136
6 New York          1.049
7 New York          1.070
8 New York          1.087
9 New York          1.016
10 New York         0.952
11 New York         1.009
12 New York         0.966
13 New York         1.176
14 New York         0.914
15 New York         1.081
16 New York         1.012
17 New York         1.028
18 New York         0.981
19 New York         0.928
20 New York         0.983
21 New York         0.958
22 New York         0.940
23 New York         0.940
24 New York         0.948
25 New York         0.978
26 New York         0.952
27 New York         0.976

With these numbers, its obvious Upstate will have to take the hit. The obvious district to cut is the 22nd, since it lacks a geographic base and is instead squished between those that do. It getting cut however probaby means a general resuffling upstate that will lock down most seats: Ithica to the 24th, Binghamton to the 23th, Rome/utica to 21st, etc.