National Public Radio has taken a look at the races for the state legislatures across the country. Overall, they find a challenging environment for Democrats which is especially troublesome given that reapportionment is upon us. The difficult environment is largely a result of the fact that Democrats currently hold more seats in a year that anti-incumbency seems to be the mood of an angry electorate.

It's conceivable that Republicans could take over as many as 20 chambers this fall. Conversely, it's difficult to name more than a handful of states where Democrats could win control.

"It's not exactly going way out on a limb to say this is a challenging election for Democrats," says Tim Storey, an elections expert with the National Conference of State Legislatures. "That's fairly obvious."

Playing On Democratic Turf
Part of the reason is simple math. Democrats are offering up many more targets.

About 6,000 of the nation's 7,400 legislative seats are at stake this fall. Democrats currently hold 55 percent of the total. The party also controls 60 chambers nationwide, compared with 36 that are held by Republicans. (Two are tied and one – Nebraska's — is nominally nonpartisan.)

Democrats have scored gains in both legislative seats and chambers three election cycles in a row — 2004, 2006 and 2008. They won many marginal seats that they'll have a hard time holding this year.

"You're building on three cycles of Democrats gaining seats," says Josh Goodman, a political reporter and blogger with Governing, a state and local government magazine. "If Democrats didn't win a seat in those three years, when would they ever win it?"

Difficult Year For Incumbents
Given that the president's party almost always loses seats during midterm elections — and that Democrats have few places left where they can realistically go on offense — Republicans would be likely to make gains under almost any circumstances.

An average of a dozen legislative chambers change hands every election cycle. It's especially tough to be running as the party in power in most states this time around.

States have had to fill budget shortfalls totaling about $300 billion over the past couple of years, meaning legislators have done almost nothing but cut spending or raise taxes, or both. They don't have a lot of shining recent policy breakthroughs they can brag about.

"This recession has made it difficult for anyone to govern and make everyone happy," says Michael Sargeant, executive director of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee.

According to NPR, the ten state legislative chambers to watch are the Alabama Senate (D:20 R:15), Colorado Senate (D:21 R:14), Indiana House (D:52 R:48), Kentucky Senate (D:17 R:20), Montana Senate (D:50 R:50), New Hampshire Senate (D:14 R:10), New York Senate (D:32 R:28 1 vacancy), Ohio House (D:53 R:46), Pennsylvania House (D:103 R:97), and the Texas House (D:73 R:77). Of these Texas will likely gain 3 to 4 House seats, Colorado may add one while New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania are likely to lose a House seat each.

National Public Radio has taken a look at the races for the state legislatures across the country. Overall, they find a challenging environment for Democrats which is especially troublesome given that reapportionment is upon us. The difficult environment is largely a result of the fact that Democrats currently hold more seats in a year that anti-incumbency seems to be the mood of an angry electorate.

It's conceivable that Republicans could take over as many as 20 chambers this fall. Conversely, it's difficult to name more than a handful of states where Democrats could win control.

"It's not exactly going way out on a limb to say this is a challenging election for Democrats," says Tim Storey, an elections expert with the National Conference of State Legislatures. "That's fairly obvious."

Playing On Democratic Turf
Part of the reason is simple math. Democrats are offering up many more targets.

About 6,000 of the nation's 7,400 legislative seats are at stake this fall. Democrats currently hold 55 percent of the total. The party also controls 60 chambers nationwide, compared with 36 that are held by Republicans. (Two are tied and one – Nebraska's — is nominally nonpartisan.)

Democrats have scored gains in both legislative seats and chambers three election cycles in a row — 2004, 2006 and 2008. They won many marginal seats that they'll have a hard time holding this year.

"You're building on three cycles of Democrats gaining seats," says Josh Goodman, a political reporter and blogger with Governing, a state and local government magazine. "If Democrats didn't win a seat in those three years, when would they ever win it?"

Difficult Year For Incumbents
Given that the president's party almost always loses seats during midterm elections — and that Democrats have few places left where they can realistically go on offense — Republicans would be likely to make gains under almost any circumstances.

An average of a dozen legislative chambers change hands every election cycle. It's especially tough to be running as the party in power in most states this time around.

States have had to fill budget shortfalls totaling about $300 billion over the past couple of years, meaning legislators have done almost nothing but cut spending or raise taxes, or both. They don't have a lot of shining recent policy breakthroughs they can brag about.

"This recession has made it difficult for anyone to govern and make everyone happy," says Michael Sargeant, executive director of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee.

According to NPR, the ten state legislative chambers to watch are the Alabama Senate (D:20 R:15), Colorado Senate (D:21 R:14), Indiana House (D:52 R:48), Kentucky Senate (D:17 R:20), Montana Senate (D:50 R:50), New Hampshire Senate (D:14 R:10), New York Senate (D:32 R:28 1 vacancy), Ohio House (D:53 R:46), Pennsylvania House (D:103 R:97), and the Texas House (D:73 R:77). Of these Texas will likely gain 3 to 4 House seats, Colorado may add one while New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania are likely to lose a House seat each.

Ben Smith passes on the following editorial from the Star Tribune of Minneapolis-St.Paul:

It's ironic that a Minnesota member of Congress, Republican Michele Bachmann, went so far last summer to declare her intention to only partially complete her census forms, and to suggest reasons for others not to comply with the census law. If Minnesota loses a congressional seat, Bachmann's populous Sixth District could be carved into pieces. She likely would have to battle another incumbent to hang on to her seat. We've noticed that her anticensus rhetoric has lately ceased. We hope she got wise: Census compliance is not only in Minnesota's best interest, but also her own.

As Charles noted last month, Minnesota is one of the states at greatest risk of losing a congressional seat following the 2010 census, making it actually possible that Michele Bachmann's machinations could cost her state -- and consequently herself -- of a congressional seat. While this would mean that the Democrats could rely on one less electoral vote (as electoral votes are tied to congressional seats), given that the next state in line after Minnesota now appears to be Oregon, another Blue state, perhaps it wouldn't be the end of the world if Bachmann lost her seat come 2012.

Election Data Services, a political consulting firm specializing in redistricting, election administration, and the analysis and presentation of census and political data, has updated its projections for reapportionment after next year's decennial US Census. Their analysis is based on estimates of each state's population on July 1, 2009, that were released earlier today by the US Census Bureau.

Their conclusion is that a total of 10 seats would shift among 17 states if the reapportionment of the House of Representatives were held today. The biggest loser, as of now, is expected to be Ohio. Ohio, which had been expected to lose one of its 18 seats since the decade's first 2010 projection, now looks in even worse shape, with a two-seat loss projected. Other losers include Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania, each with a seat apiece. If Ohio doesn't cede two seat then it's likely that Rhode Island will lose one. For Rhode Island that would mean that it would become a single district constituency joining Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming as a state with just one House member.

All eight states that would gain seats based on the 2009 population estimates are in the South and West: Texas would gain three, with one seat apiece for Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington. If Texas does gain three seats, it would bring the Lone Star state 35 Representatives and 37 Electoral College Votes.

California, as it stands now, would neither gain nor lose a seat. This would mark the first time since the Golden State joined the Union in 1850 that it did not gain at least one seat. However, Election Data Services believes that California may be on the cusp of losing a seat for the first time ever.

But even more at risk of losing a House seat is Minnesota. Although using the 2009 population estimates shows Minnesota barely holding on to its eighth and final House seat, a number of EDS models suggest that Minnesota may lose a seat. If so, then Minnesota's loss is likely a fourth seat for Texas. Should California lose a seat, then it's possible that Arizona may gain a second seat.

The demographic trends are consistent with the general pattern observed since 1960 that has seen a shift in population from the Northeast towards the Sunbelt.

The New York Times has more on the Census Bureau data released today. A quick takeaway:

States in the South and the West that grew by exceptional leaps and bounds during the real estate boom of just a few years ago are now experiencing sharply slower growth in population, the Census Bureau said Wednesday.

Many of those states are still projected to gain seats in Congress after the 2010 census, however, while industrial states in the Northeast and the Midwest will most likely see their delegations shrink.

But in a sign of the recession’s power to reshape established demographic trends, the new census figures show that growth has slowed substantially in Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina, while in Florida, Nevada and California, more Americans moved out than in.

As a corollary, the new data show that several states in the Northeast — like New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts — are holding on to more residents.

One of the more salient data points is that between July 2008 and July 2009, Texas added more people from home and abroad than any other state — 231,539. That is more than Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida and Nevada, combined.

There's more...

There's more...