Introduction
Congressional districts
State Rep districts
Commissioners Court/JP precincts
Comparing 2012 and 2016
Statewide judicial
Other jurisdictions
Appellate courts, Part 1
Appellate courts, Part 2
Judicial averages
Other cities
District Attorney
County Attorney
Sheriff
Tax Assessor
County Clerk
HCDE
Fort Bend, part 1
Fort Bend, part 2
Fort Bend, part 3
Brazoria County
Harris County State Senate comparisons
State Senate districts 2020
State Senate district comparisons
State House districts 2020, part 1
State House districts 2020, part 2
Median districts
State House district changes by demography
State House district changes by county
SBOE
In addition to the SBOE data, we finally have 2020 election results for the Congressional districts as well. With the redistricting special session about to start, let’s look at where things were in the last election.
Dist Biden Trump Biden% Trump%
=====================================
01 83,221 218,689 27.2% 71.5%
02 170,430 174,980 48.6% 49.9%
03 209,859 214,359 48.6% 49.6%
04 84,582 258,314 24.3% 74.3%
05 107,494 172,395 37.9% 60.8%
06 164,746 175,101 47.8% 50.8%
07 170,060 143,176 53.6% 45.1%
08 109,291 274,224 28.1% 70.5%
09 178,908 54,944 75.7% 23.2%
10 203,937 210,734 48.4% 50.0%
11 58,585 235,797 19.7% 79.1%
12 140,683 224,490 37.9% 60.4%
13 54,001 219,885 19.4% 79.1%
14 124,630 185,961 39.5% 59.0%
15 119,785 115,317 50.4% 48.5%
16 160,809 77,473 66.4% 32.0%
17 137,632 172,338 43.5% 54.5%
18 189,823 57,669 75.7% 23.0%
19 71,238 195,512 26.3% 72.2%
20 177,167 96,672 63.7% 34.7%
21 220,439 232,935 47.8% 50.5%
22 206,114 210,011 48.8% 49.7%
23 146,619 151,914 48.5% 50.2%
24 180,609 161,671 51.9% 46.5%
25 177,801 216,143 44.3% 53.9%
26 185,956 248,196 42.1% 56.2%
27 104,511 170,800 37.4% 61.1%
28 125,628 115,109 51.6% 47.2%
29 106,229 52,937 65.9% 32.9%
30 212,373 50,270 79.8% 18.9%
31 191,113 202,934 47.4% 50.3%
32 187,919 151,944 54.4% 44.0%
33 117,340 41,209 73.0% 25.6%
34 106,837 98,533 51.5% 47.5%
35 188,138 84,796 67.6% 30.5%
36 82,872 221,600 26.9% 71.9%
Joe Biden carried 14 of the 36 Congressional districts, the 13 that Democratic candidates won plus CD24. He came close in a lot of others – within two points in CDs 02, 03, 10, 22, and 23, and within five in CDs 06, 21, and 31 – but the Congressional map gets the award for most effecting gerrymandering, as the Presidential results most closely matched the number of districts won.
Generally speaking, Biden did a little worse than Beto in 2018, which isn’t a big surprise given that Beto lost by two and a half points while Biden lost by five and a half. Among the competitive districts, Biden topped Beto in CDs 03 (48.6 to 47.9), 07 (53.6 to 53.3), and 24 (51.9 to 51.6), and fell short elsewhere. He lost the most ground compared to Beto in the Latino districts, which is a subject we have covered in much detail. I only focused on the closer districts in my 2018 analysis, but you can see the full 2018 data here. Biden’s numbers are far more comparable to Hillary Clinton’s in 2016 – I’ll get into that in more detail in a subsequent post.
As we have also seen elsewhere, Biden’s underperformance in the Latino districts – specifically, CDs 15, 28, and 34 – was generally not replicated by other candidates down the ballot. Again, I’ll get to this in more detail later, but with the exception of John Cornyn nipping MJ Hegar in CD15, Democrats other than Biden generally carried those districts by five to ten points, still closer than in 2016 but not as dire looking as they were at the top. Interestingly, where Biden really overperformed compared to the rest of the Democratic ticket was with the judicial races – Republicans carried all but one of the statewide judicial races in CD07, for example. We discussed that way back when in the earlier analyses, but it’s been awhile so this is a reminder. That’s also not too surprising given the wider spread in the judicial races than the Presidential race, and it’s also a place where one can be optimistic (we still have room to grow!) or pessimistic (we’re farther away than we thought!) as one sees fit.
I don’t have a lot more to say here that I haven’t already said in one or more ways before. The main thing to think about is that redistricting is necessarily different for the Congressional map simply because there will be two more districts. (We should think about adding legislative districts, especially Senate districts, but that’s a whole ‘nother thing.) I have to assume that Republicans will try to give themselves two more districts, one way or another, but I suppose it’s possible they could just seek to hold serve, if going for the gusto means cutting it too close in too many places. I figure we’ll see a starter map pretty soon, and from there it will be a matter of what alternate realities get proposed and by whom. For sure, the future plaintiffs in redistricting litigation will have their own maps to show off.
For comparison, as I did in other posts, here are the Congressional numbers from 2016 and 2012:
Dist Clinton TrumpClinton% Trump%
=====================================
1 66,389 189,596 25.09% 71.67%
2 119,659 145,530 42.75% 52.00%
3 129,384 174,561 39.90% 53.83%
4 60,799 210,448 21.63% 74.86%
5 79,759 145,846 34.18% 62.50%
6 115,272 148,945 41.62% 53.78%
7 124,722 121,204 48.16% 46.81%
8 70,520 214,567 23.64% 71.93%
9 151,559 34,447 79.14% 17.99%
10 135,967 164,817 42.82% 51.90%
11 47,470 193,619 19.01% 77.55%
12 92,549 177,939 32.47% 62.43%
13 40,237 190,779 16.78% 79.54%
14 101,228 153,191 38.29% 57.95%
15 104,454 73,689 56.21% 39.66%
16 130,784 52,334 67.21% 26.89%
17 96,155 139,411 38.43% 55.72%
18 157,117 41,011 76.22% 19.90%
19 53,512 165,280 23.31% 71.99%
20 132,453 74,479 60.21% 33.86%
21 152,515 188,277 42.05% 51.91%
22 135,525 159,717 43.91% 51.75%
23 115,133 107,058 49.38% 45.92%
24 122,878 140,129 44.28% 50.50%
25 125,947 172,462 39.94% 54.69%
26 109,530 194,032 34.01% 60.25%
27 85,589 140,787 36.36% 59.81%
28 109,973 72,479 57.81% 38.10%
29 95,027 34,011 70.95% 25.39%
30 174,528 40,333 79.08% 18.27%
31 117,181 153,823 40.07% 52.60%
32 134,895 129,701 48.44% 46.58%
33 94,513 30,787 72.78% 23.71%
34 101,704 64,716 59.07% 37.59%
35 128,482 61,139 63.59% 30.26%
36 64,217 183,144 25.13% 71.68%
Dist Obama Romney Obama% Romney%
=====================================
01 69,857 181,833 27.47% 71.49%
02 88,751 157,094 35.55% 62.93%
03 93,290 175,383 34.13% 64.16%
04 63,521 189,455 24.79% 73.95%
05 73,085 137,239 34.35% 64.49%
06 103,444 146,985 40.72% 57.87%
07 92,499 143,631 38.57% 59.89%
08 55,271 195,735 21.74% 76.97%
09 145,332 39,392 78.01% 21.15%
10 104,839 159,714 38.77% 59.06%
11 45,081 182,403 19.55% 79.10%
12 79,147 166,992 31.65% 66.77%
13 42,518 184,090 18.51% 80.16%
14 97,824 147,151 39.44% 59.32%
15 86,940 62,883 57.35% 41.48%
16 100,993 54,315 64.03% 34.44%
17 84,243 134,521 37.76% 60.29%
18 150,129 44,991 76.11% 22.81%
19 54,451 160,060 25.02% 73.55%
20 110,663 74,540 58.77% 39.59%
21 119,220 188,240 37.85% 59.76%
22 93,582 158,452 36.68% 62.11%
23 94,386 99,654 47.99% 50.67%
24 94,634 150,547 37.98% 60.42%
25 102,433 162,278 37.80% 59.89%
26 80,828 177,941 30.70% 67.59%
27 83,156 131,800 38.15% 60.46%
28 101,843 65,372 60.21% 38.65%
29 75,720 37,909 65.89% 32.99%
30 175,637 43,333 79.61% 19.64%
31 92,842 144,634 38.11% 59.36%
32 106,563 146,420 41.46% 56.97%
33 86,686 32,641 71.93% 27.09%
34 90,885 57,303 60.71% 38.28%
35 105,550 58,007 62.94% 34.59%
36 61,766 175,850 25.66% 73.05%
Looking at the 2016 numbers, you can begin to see the outlines of future competitiveness. That’s more a function of Trump’s weak showing in the familiar places than anything else, but Democrats got their numbers up enough to make it a reality. Looking back at 2012 and you’re reminded again of just how far we’ve come. Maybe we’ll reset to that kind of position in 2022, I don’t know, but that’s a little harder to imagine when you remember that Mitt Romney won the state by ten more points than Trump did. We’ll be going down that rabbit hole soon enough. As always, let me know what you think.