House Democrats Inch Closer to Becoming a Two-State Caucus
Californians and New Yorkers will comprise a record percentage of the Democratic caucus when the 113th Congress convenes in January at nearly 30 percent
Although gains by Democrats were modest in 2012 U.S. House races – netting eight seats nationwide – the delegations from two coastal states still managed to increase their ever-growing influence on the party.
For despite the State of New York losing two seats due to reapportionment after the 2010 U.S. Census, the Democratic Party saw the percentage of its caucus from the Empire State and California delegations increase to an all-time high – now just shy of 30 percent of the 201 seats it will hold across the country in January.
A Smart Politics analysis of 83 general election cycles dating back to 1850 finds that the Democratic Party now comprises a larger percentage of Californians and New Yorkers in the U.S. House than at any point since California joined the Union.
When the 113th Congress convenes in January, 29.4 percent of the 201-member Democratic caucus will hail from California (38 members) and New York (21 members).
That marks an increase from the two-state delegation’s collective previous all-time high of 28.1 percent recorded after the Republican tsunami of 2010 (increasing for a few months to 28.5 percent after Kathy Hochul’s win in NY-26 in 2011).
With new district lines in place, the 2012 cycle saw Democrats hold serve in New York – picking off Nan Hayworth in NY-18 and Ann Buerkle in NY-24 but seeing Rep. Hochul lose in NY-27.
Democrats will control 21 of 27 New York seats in January compared to the 21 of 29 they hold today.
The party also netted four seats in California:
· Defeating nine-term Republican Dan Lungren in CA-07.
· Winning the open seat left by the retired 13-term Republican Elton Gallegly in CA-26.
· Beating eight-term Republican Mary Bono Mack in CA-36.
· Defeating seven-term Republican Brian Bilbray in CA-52.
While California and New York are two of the three most populous states in the country, it is important to note that the number of representatives from the two states collectively has remained relatively flat over the last 50 years.
Since 1962, New York and California have accounted for between no less than 18.2 percent and no more than 19.1 percent of all seats in the nation’s lower legislative chamber (with California’s delegation increasing and New York’s decreasing during this span).
And yet, during this 50-year period, the percentage of the Democratic caucus hailing from these two states has increased by more than two-thirds: from 17.4 percent in 1962 to 29.4 percent in January 2013.
In fact, the percentage of seats held by the Democratic caucus from New York and California compared to their relative percentage of seats in the House overall has never been more out of proportion.
California and New York hold 29.4 percent of seats in the Democratic caucus but just 18.4 percent of U.S. House seats overall for a +11.0-point differential.
The largest previous differential was seen after the Civil War in 1866 when Democrats from the two states held 25.5 percent of their caucus’ seats and the total representatives from the two states accounted for 15.0 percent of House seats overall for a +10.5-point difference.
The percentage of seats held by Democrats in California at the start of the 113th Congress will be at a 76-year high, with 38 of the 53 seats under the party’s control, or 71.7 percent.
The last time the party eclipsed the 70 percent mark in the Golden State delegation was after the Election of 1936 when Democrats controlled 15 of 20 seats (75 percent).
In New York, 77.8 percent of its seats will be under Democratic control which is the third highest in Empire State history, behind the Elections of 2008 (26 of 29 seats, 89.7 percent) and 2006 (23 of 29, 79.3 percent).
At 59 seats collectively, the raw number of representatives in the Democratic caucus hailing from these two states coming out of a general election has been eclipsed only once: when the party won 60 seats in the Election of 2008.
However, Democrats have never been as reliant on the New York and California delegations as they are today, as the caucus won 257 seats in the 2008 cycle, compared to just 201 two weeks ago.
Democratic New York and California U.S. House Delegations by Election Cycle, 1850-2012
Year
|
New York
|
California
|
Total
|
Democrats
|
% NY/CA
|
2012
|
21
|
38
|
59
|
201
|
29.4
|
2010
|
20
|
34
|
54
|
193
|
28.1
|
2008
|
26
|
34
|
60
|
257
|
23.3
|
2006
|
23
|
34
|
57
|
233
|
24.5
|
2004
|
20
|
34
|
54
|
202
|
26.7
|
2002
|
19
|
33
|
52
|
205
|
25.4
|
2000
|
19
|
32
|
51
|
212
|
24.1
|
1998
|
18
|
28
|
46
|
211
|
21.8
|
1996
|
18
|
29
|
47
|
206
|
22.8
|
1994
|
17
|
27
|
44
|
204
|
21.6
|
1992
|
18
|
30
|
48
|
258
|
18.6
|
1990
|
21
|
26
|
47
|
267
|
17.6
|
1988
|
21
|
27
|
48
|
260
|
18.5
|
1986
|
20
|
27
|
47
|
258
|
18.2
|
1984
|
19
|
27
|
46
|
253
|
18.2
|
1982
|
20
|
28
|
48
|
269
|
17.8
|
1980
|
22
|
22
|
44
|
242
|
18.2
|
1978
|
27
|
26
|
53
|
277
|
19.1
|
1976
|
28
|
29
|
57
|
292
|
19.5
|
1974
|
27
|
28
|
55
|
291
|
18.9
|
1972
|
22
|
23
|
45
|
242
|
18.6
|
1970
|
24
|
21
|
45
|
255
|
17.6
|
1968
|
26
|
21
|
47
|
243
|
19.3
|
1966
|
26
|
21
|
47
|
247
|
19.0
|
1964
|
27
|
23
|
50
|
295
|
16.9
|
1962
|
20
|
25
|
45
|
259
|
17.4
|
1960
|
22
|
16
|
38
|
263
|
14.4
|
1958
|
19
|
16
|
35
|
283
|
12.4
|
1956
|
17
|
13
|
30
|
234
|
12.8
|
1954
|
17
|
11
|
28
|
232
|
12.1
|
1952
|
16
|
11
|
27
|
213
|
12.7
|
1950
|
23
|
10
|
33
|
235
|
14.0
|
1948
|
24
|
10
|
34
|
263
|
12.9
|
1946
|
17
|
9
|
26
|
188
|
13.8
|
1944
|
23
|
16
|
39
|
242
|
16.1
|
1942
|
23
|
12
|
35
|
222
|
15.8
|
1940
|
25
|
11
|
36
|
267
|
13.5
|
1938
|
25
|
12
|
37
|
262
|
14.1
|
1936
|
27
|
15
|
42
|
334
|
12.6
|
1934
|
29
|
13
|
42
|
322
|
13.0
|
1932
|
29
|
11
|
40
|
313
|
12.8
|
1930
|
23
|
1
|
24
|
216
|
11.1
|
1928
|
23
|
1
|
24
|
164
|
14.6
|
1926
|
25
|
1
|
26
|
194
|
13.4
|
1924
|
22
|
2
|
24
|
183
|
13.1
|
1922
|
23
|
2
|
25
|
207
|
12.1
|
1920
|
9
|
2
|
11
|
131
|
8.4
|
1918
|
19
|
4
|
23
|
192
|
12.0
|
1916
|
16
|
4
|
20
|
214
|
9.3
|
1914
|
18
|
3
|
21
|
230
|
9.1
|
1912
|
31
|
3
|
34
|
291
|
11.7
|
1910
|
21
|
1
|
22
|
230
|
9.6
|
1908
|
12
|
0
|
12
|
172
|
7.0
|
1906
|
12
|
0
|
12
|
167
|
7.2
|
1904
|
11
|
0
|
11
|
135
|
8.1
|
1902
|
16
|
3
|
19
|
176
|
10.8
|
1900
|
13
|
0
|
13
|
151
|
8.6
|
1898
|
18
|
1
|
19
|
161
|
11.8
|
1896
|
6
|
2
|
8
|
124
|
6.5
|
1894
|
5*
|
1
|
6
|
93
|
6.5
|
1892
|
20
|
3
|
23
|
218
|
10.6
|
1890
|
23
|
2
|
25
|
238
|
10.5
|
1888
|
16
|
2
|
18
|
152
|
11.8
|
1886
|
15
|
2
|
17
|
167
|
10.2
|
1884
|
17
|
1
|
18
|
182
|
9.9
|
1882
|
21
|
6
|
27
|
196
|
13.8
|
1880
|
12*
|
2
|
14
|
128
|
10.9
|
1878
|
8
|
1
|
9
|
141
|
6.4
|
1876
|
16
|
1
|
17
|
155
|
11.0
|
1874
|
16
|
3
|
19
|
182
|
10.4
|
1872
|
9
|
1
|
10
|
88
|
11.4
|
1870
|
16
|
0
|
16
|
104
|
15.4
|
1868
|
12*
|
2
|
14
|
67
|
20.9
|
1866
|
10
|
2
|
12
|
47
|
25.5
|
1864
|
10*
|
0
|
10
|
38
|
26.3
|
1862
|
17
|
0
|
17
|
72
|
23.6
|
1860
|
9
|
0
|
9
|
44
|
20.5
|
1858
|
3
|
2
|
5
|
83
|
6.0
|
1856
|
12
|
2
|
14
|
132
|
10.6
|
1854
|
5
|
2
|
7
|
83
|
8.4
|
1852
|
20
|
2
|
22
|
157
|
14.0
|
1850
|
16
|
2
|
18
|
127
|
14.2
|
Total
|
1,531
|
982
|
2,513
|
16,436
|
15.5
|
Data reflects totals based on Election Day results, except (*) adjusts for contested elections in which a new winner was selected. Data compiled by Smart Politics.
Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.
I’m not sure why this is considered unusual or a surprise, when California and New York collectively contain 21% of the U.S. population. Two large, heavily-Democratic states send a large number of Democratic representatives to the House. Film at 11?
But the two states hold only 18.4 percent of House seats and their relative share of House seats has been static (collectively) for the past 50 years while their share of the Democratic caucus has increased by two-thirds during this span. That’s a big change.
So ***that’s*** what Democrats mean when they say they “look like America”.
I’m bothered by both the title and the premise. The title implies that a 2 state caucus is possible (it isn’t even close to possible). I’m also bothered by the premise that this is somehow unique to Democrats – the Republican caucus has over 20% from Texas, FL and GA. Both caucuses have shifted over the past 25 years, as Dixie Dems have turned Republican and the west coast has turned solid Democratic. A far more interesting study would look at shifts that changed those two states and what that means. The NY of today is not the NY of 25 years ago (deindustrialization of upstate NY) and CA’s minority majority status may have changed the priorities for voters.
What are the differences between North Korean elections and elections in New York and California?
Well, for starters, North Korean elections are freer, have better candidates, and are more competitive.
But, this is just a reflection of three facts, Democrats lost seats in 2010, NY and CA are high population and mainly blue. Hop the border to Oregon and see about 1 percent of US population accounting for 2 percent of Democratic caucus. So, 18.4 percent NY CA yields 29.4 percent of caucus, influence significantly less than double. In Oregon, 4 of 5 Representatives are Democrats (80%), 1 percent of US population with twice that influence in House. The numbers you use are a mix of apples and oranges and strike me as not so very useful for just that reason.
So in the other 48 states Republicans hold close to a 100 seat majority.
Very interesting (not earth-shattering) data.
I’d never thought about it this way.
Funny how some readers seem so upset at anything that might even remotely be seen as unflattering to the Democrats! Chill.
Interesting point of view. Wondering what the impact of gerrymandering has been over the years, and if it is as extreme as the Democrats would have us believe?