If California left, where would its seats go?

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

Obviously, I do not expect California to secede or any other state for that matter, but if it were to happen, I calculated where its congressional districts would go. I often find conservatives saying "we should just let California leave so the rest of the country will be conservative." Similar statements were made by liberals about Texas before they realized they can probably flip it in a few decades with demographics. These are based on the most recent population estimates (July 2016) and calculated using the standard formula (p/sqrt(n)(n+1)). Just how much more republican would California's exit make the US House?

AK- 1 no change
HI- 2 no change
WA- 11 +1 D
OR- 6 +1 R
ID- 3 +1 R
NV- 5 +1 D? (NV's two swing districts could turn lean D with a new R district or lean R with a new D district in Vegas, depending on who controls redistricting.)
UT- 5 +1 R
AZ- 11 +1 R +1 D
NM- 3 no change
CO- 8 +1 D
WY- 1 no change
MT- 2 +1 R (A Missoula based district could be competitive in a good D year. MT is swingy)
ND- 1 no change (despite having the fastest population growth rate in percentage terms)
SD- 1 no change
NE- 3 no change
KS- 4 no change
OK- 6 +1 R
TX- 43 +4 D +3 R (bit of a wild guess, depends on whether the courts fight gerrymandering)
LA- 7 +1 R (reverses the loss of a district post Katrina)
AR- 5 +1 R
MO- 9 +1 R
IA- 5 +1 R? (Iowa has basically 3 swing districts and 1 R. Trump won all four. If the GOP stays strong, a 4-1 R lead could be easy. If 2016 is an outliar, 3-2 R is more likely.)
MN- 8 no change (Peterson's district becomes R when he retires though)
WI- 9 +1 R (could be +1D, but Ds are packed into Milwaukee and Madison and Rs control redistricting)
IL- 20 +1 D +1R (+2 D if Ds get to gerrymander)
IN- 10 +1 R
MI- 15 +1 D (or perhaps a swing district in the Detroit suburbs. The city itself is still in decline)
OH- 18 +1 D +1 R (Ohio, the biggest loser of 2010 reapportionment, gets its seats back for now)
WV- 3 no change (WV was the only state to lose population in absolute terms since 2010)
KY- 7 +1 R
TN- 10 +1 R
MS- 5 +1 R (a surprising gain for a small state with slow growth)
AL- 7 no change
FL- 31 +2 D +2 R (note that two Rs hold seats with D+5 PVIs as of now. Efforts to make them safer could mean +3 D +1 R for new seats)
GA- 16 +1 D +1 R
SC- 8 +1 R
NC- 16 +2 D +1 R (assuming the courts don't allow another crazy gerrymander. NC got the last district distributed)
VA- 13 +2 D (+1 R, -1 swing district. Comstock likely shifted to safer R territory)
MD- 9 +1 R (surely they can't find a way to gerrymander yet another D district, right?)
DE- 2 +1 swing district
PA- 20 +1 R +1 D (things might actually become less gerrymandered once Rs create a fourth D district in the Philly area. At least one R district would only be leans R, a potential swing district in a good D year)
NJ- 14 +2 D
NY- 30 +2 D +1 R (Rs might have a shot at a third district on Long Island, giving them the +2 instead)
CT- 5 no change
RI- 2 no change (no longer has the least amount of people per district)
MA- 10 +1 D
VT- 1 no change
NH- 2 no change
ME- 2 no change

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

Total new R districts: 26-32
Total new D districts: 21-27
CA districts: 39 D, 14 R

Republicans would likely gain at least a dozen seats in the House if California seceded, not factoring in the massive political fallout from that actually occurring.

I may try to draw new maps for all the states with more districts, even though I know things will be different with 2020 census data.

[Dr. MB]

The Democratic Party would no doubt get more conservative, maybe not on economics but would probably move toward a pro-gun position and abandon other policies mainly driven by the urban California liberals. I could see them picking up some more rural midwestern and New York seats and I don't think the image would be as tainted now among white southerners.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

I don't see Idaho or Utah's new districts being R. Boise and SLC could force at least one of their states' districts to be D.

[Kamala]

I don't see Idaho or Utah's new districts being R. Boise and SLC could force at least one of their states' districts to be D.

Ada County is neither liberal enough (voted 48-39 Trump-Clinton, 54-42 Romney-Obama) nor large enough (only about 400k, needs more than 500k) to sustain a district.

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

The Democratic Party would no doubt get more conservative, maybe not on economics but would probably move toward a pro-gun position and abandon other policies mainly driven by the urban California liberals. I could see them picking up some more rural midwestern and New York seats and I don't think the image would be as tainted now among white southerners.

Most likely, yes. They might also just hold out in hopes of the country continuing to drift leftward with demographic change.  More Sherrod Brown and less Nancy Pelosi couldn't hurt them in the Midwest though.

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

I don't see Idaho or Utah's new districts being R. Boise and SLC could force at least one of their states' districts to be D.

Ada County is neither liberal enough (voted 48-39 Trump-Clinton, 54-42 Romney-Obama) nor large enough (only about 400k, needs more than 500k) to sustain a district.

Agreed. Idaho is very conservative. SLC Utah could maybe form a democrat district, but it's worth noting that Hillary barely reached 40% in Salt Lake County and only beat Trump there due to McMullin splitting the republican vote. It might be a tossup, but not likely democrat.

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

I don't see Idaho or Utah's new districts being R. Boise and SLC could force at least one of their states' districts to be D.

Ada County is neither liberal enough (voted 48-39 Trump-Clinton, 54-42 Romney-Obama) nor large enough (only about 400k, needs more than 500k) to sustain a district.

Agreed. Idaho is very conservative. SLC Utah could maybe form a democrat district, but it's worth noting that Hillary barely reached 40% in Salt Lake County and only beat Trump there due to McMullin splitting the republican vote. It might be a tossup, but not likely democrat.

There's a ballot initiative in 2018 for a fair map commission in Utah that is binding, so I guess we'll see! But yes, it's pretty easy to make a Democratic seat entirely within SLC.

I hope they do get a fair map. Even with it, I'm not sure that Dems would get an easy pickup. Romney won Salt Lake County by 20%. A Mormon Republican will consistently run above the national ticket, especially if it's Trump.

Unrelated edit: A second Delaware district would certainly have voted for Trump. Unfortunately, Dave's redistricting doesn't have a PVI calculator for Delaware, so I can't definitively say it would be an R district based on one election.

[Dr. MB]

I don't see Idaho or Utah's new districts being R. Boise and SLC could force at least one of their states' districts to be D.

Ada County is neither liberal enough (voted 48-39 Trump-Clinton, 54-42 Romney-Obama) nor large enough (only about 400k, needs more than 500k) to sustain a district.

Utah is possible, it would be D plus a few points but wouldn't be a completely solid seat. Idaho with 2 districts is physically impossible, you can make one that leans R a bit but even if you combine literally all Democratic precincts in the state (mostly in Boise, Pocatello, and Moscow area), that's still not enough to create a majority-D seat.