Redistricting history and proccess
Since it attained statehood in 1850, California has grown to become the largest state in the country. As a result, it has the largest congressional delegation – 52 members. For most of its history, California has seen its congressional districts grow; at the start of the 20th century, the state only had eight seats in the House.
As California continued to swell in population, it wouldn’t be uncommon for the state to gain multiple districts in a single cycle, like the eight it gained after the 1960 Census or the seven it gained following the 1990 Census. The 2020 Census delivered an oddity, however – California lost a congressional district for the first time in history.
Population growth has slowed or reversed, and it’s anticipated that California will continue to hold lose congressional districts in the near future. If current trends continue, the state could lose as many as five congressional districts in the 2030 reapportionment cycle.
As a result of Proposition 20 passing in 2010, both California’s congressional and legislative maps are drawn by an independent commission. The commission is picked in two phases; eight members are selected at random from a group of finalists, and those eight choose six more members from the same group of finalists. The 14-member panel has five Democrats, five Republicans, and four independents. In order to decide on maps, at least three members from each group must be in agreement.
The most recent redistricting commission had a decidedly liberal bent, with even one of its Republican members – Jane Andersen of Berkeley – seemingly leaning left. It’s not a surprise, then, that the current map made some unusual decisions that benefitted Democrats on paper. In particular, the draw of CA-20 includes unusual tendrils to draw in seemingly as many Republican voters as possible, leaving the surrounding Central Valley seats more Democratic as a result. However, the map is far from a Democratic gerrymander, or at least one the Democratic-controlled legislature would have drawn.
Demographic breakdown
| District | White | Hispanic | Black | Asian | Native | Pacific |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 65.33% | 19.53% | 2.69% | 6.74% | 6.00% | 0.66% |
| 2 | 68.40% | 17.91% | 2.56% | 5.93% | 5.40% | 0.60% |
| 3 | 72.32% | 12.39% | 2.37% | 8.89% | 3.63% | 0.65% |
| 4 | 55.32% | 27.54% | 4.08% | 10.03% | 3.99% | 0.84% |
| 5 | 63.03% | 22.32% | 3.10% | 7.63% | 4.39% | 0.91% |
| 6 | 51.14% | 20.33% | 11.09% | 14.67% | 3.84% | 1.51% |
| 7 | 35.00% | 24.06% | 12.42% | 26.04% | 3.49% | 2.37% |
| 8 | 26.94% | 31.53% | 17.74% | 22.37% | 3.58% | 1.56% |
| 9 | 32.64% | 37.60% | 8.99% | 19.40% | 3.80% | 1.26% |
| 10 | 51.29% | 16.65% | 5.81% | 24.53% | 2.28% | 0.91% |
| 11 | 44.64% | 13.19% | 6.57% | 34.22% | 1.93% | 0.69% |
| 12 | 35.19% | 21.18% | 18.00% | 24.59% | 3.07% | 0.93% |
| 13 | 25.86% | 60.72% | 4.01% | 7.81% | 4.99% | 0.75% |
| 14 | 28.16% | 22.76% | 6.57% | 40.80% | 2.56% | 1.89% |
| 15 | 30.18% | 24.65% | 3.68% | 39.60% | 2.15% | 1.76% |
| 16 | 46.29% | 17.36% | 2.77% | 32.05% | 2.02% | 0.72% |
| 17 | 22.85% | 15.07% | 2.69% | 58.51% | 1.61% | 0.79% |
| 18 | 21.30% | 60.76% | 3.00% | 14.29% | 4.92% | 0.70% |
| 19 | 51.71% | 21.98% | 3.25% | 20.93% | 3.08% | 0.83% |
| 20 | 53.39% | 30.13% | 4.41% | 9.00% | 4.46% | 0.51% |
| 21 | 21.15% | 60.72% | 5.80% | 11.26% | 4.31% | 0.37% |
| 22 | 18.73% | 69.32% | 5.80% | 5.07% | 4.04% | 0.36% |
| 23 | 44.14% | 37.35% | 10.04% | 6.25% | 4.32% | 0.77% |
| 24 | 54.16% | 33.90% | 2.57% | 7.35% | 3.81% | 0.48% |
| 25 | 28.43% | 60.38% | 5.65% | 4.18% | 4.29% | 0.42% |
| 26 | 46.23% | 39.07% | 2.70% | 10.60% | 3.40% | 0.52% |
| 27 | 37.24% | 39.20% | 11.32% | 11.30% | 3.42% | 0.49% |
| 28 | 28.94% | 24.65% | 4.76% | 41.36% | 2.26% | 0.39% |
| 29 | 23.56% | 61.09% | 5.25% | 9.80% | 3.71% | 0.31% |
| 30 | 57.11% | 21.95% | 4.88% | 15.06% | 2.09% | 0.35% |
| 31 | 16.74% | 57.41% | 3.31% | 22.46% | 3.67% | 0.36% |
| 32 | 54.78% | 23.48% | 5.64% | 15.05% | 2.04% | 0.39% |
| 33 | 20.06% | 58.65% | 11.94% | 8.90% | 3.88% | 0.58% |
| 34 | 12.37% | 61.62% | 5.67% | 20.36% | 4.42% | 0.32% |
| 35 | 16.98% | 61.22% | 7.65% | 13.90% | 3.87% | 0.53% |
| 36 | 57.55% | 15.46% | 4.84% | 20.55% | 1.82% | 0.55% |
| 37 | 14.60% | 50.34% | 26.50% | 8.52% | 3.75% | 0.32% |
| 38 | 15.09% | 58.27% | 2.69% | 23.77% | 3.57% | 0.47% |
| 39 | 22.37% | 58.54% | 10.43% | 7.90% | 3.87% | 0.67% |
| 40 | 51.60% | 22.76% | 2.52% | 21.71% | 2.18% | 0.55% |
| 41 | 48.23% | 34.23% | 6.17% | 9.72% | 3.21% | 0.71% |
| 42 | 20.68% | 61.08% | 7.94% | 9.81% | 3.96% | 0.67% |
| 43 | 7.96% | 54.07% | 27.37% | 10.56% | 3.50% | 0.74% |
| 44 | 14.40% | 57.92% | 12.78% | 14.24% | 3.90% | 1.36% |
| 45 | 27.50% | 27.26% | 2.90% | 41.43% | 2.22% | 0.79% |
| 46 | 17.24% | 61.17% | 2.69% | 18.28% | 4.42% | 0.66% |
| 47 | 53.04% | 15.99% | 2.43% | 26.91% | 1.80% | 0.60% |
| 48 | 57.07% | 26.21% | 4.38% | 9.59% | 3.88% | 0.89% |
| 49 | 60.97% | 24.49% | 3.32% | 9.07% | 2.80% | 0.94% |
| 50 | 57.87% | 19.58% | 3.99% | 16.78% | 2.09% | 0.66% |
| 51 | 48.56% | 22.61% | 7.45% | 19.91% | 2.53% | 1.10% |
| 52 | 15.28% | 57.24% | 9.43% | 18.34% | 3.26% | 1.07% |
| State | 37.87% | 35.95% | 6.81% | 17.85% | 3.39% | 0.77% |
California’s population primarily consists of Whites, Hispanics, and Asians. White voters make up a majority or plurality in 26 districts, while Hispanics make up a majority or plurality in 21; the remaining five districts are majority or plurality Asian. Many congressional districts in California are extremely diverse, and a large number do not have a single racial group comprising a majority of the population.
White voters are predominant in Northern California, the southern and western LA suburbs, and parts of the Central Valley and Bay Area. The whitest district in the state is CA-03, which stretches from the Sacramento suburbs into ski country. Hispanic voters make up the largest share of the electorate in the Central Valley and many Los Angeles-area districts. The district with the largest Hispanic population, CA-22, stretches from Kings and Tulare Counties into Bakersfield. Asian voters are concentrated in the Bay Area and Los Angeles suburbs; only one district, the San Jose-based CA-17, has a majority-Asian population, although two others (CA-45 and CA-28) are over 40% Asian.
California does not have a large Black population. Black voters are mainly concentrated in a handful of districts in the Los Angeles area, specifically CA-37 and CA-43, where Black voters make up over 25% of the electorate, and the Oakland and Berkeley-based CA-12, where Black voters are 18% of the electorate.
Educational attainment in California is broadly well above-average, but it in many ways represents an extreme. California has 18 of the top 100 districts in college education, but also 18 of the top 100 least-college educated districts. Four of the top 10 most educated districts are in California, as well as five of the top 10 least-educated districts. The state does, however, lack in white working-class voters; only three of the state’s districts even rank in the top half.
Educational attainment is most apparent in the Bay Area and in the affluent Los Angeles suburbs of Southern California. In CA-36 – which encompasses affluent neighborhoods in Los Angeles County – 64.1% of adults have a bachelor’s degree or higher, the third-largest total in the United States. Also ranking near the top are the San Francisco-area CA-11 (5th) and CA-16 (8th), and the Asian-majority CA-17 (10th) – which also ranks as the wealthiest in the nation.
In contrast, college education is lowest in the state’s Central Valley, which has a large Hispanic population and a heavy focus on agriculture, as well as in the more rural areas in the far reaches of San Bernardino, Riverside, and Imperial counties. CA-22, which draws in Kings County, Tulare County, and a large portion of Bakersfield, is the least-college educated district in the country; only 9.1% of adults have a bachelor’s degree or higher. Neighboring CA-13 is the third-least college educated at 12.2%.
Political history
Once once of the country’s premier swing states, California has solidified itself as a Democratic bastion. But even before that, Republicans struggled to make inways in the congressional delegation; the last time Republicans held an outright majority of districts was 1958, only once since then (1995-96) did the state even see a tied delegation.
Nowadays, such a competitive scenario is impossible. The last Republican presidential nominee to win over 40% of the vote here was George W. Bush in 2004, and Republican nominees have since been mired in the mid-to-low 30s. However, Republicans still punched well above their weight in the congressional delegation for years, owing to both a bipartisan gerrymander in the 2000s and strong incumbents in the 2010s.
That all changed in the blue wave of 2018, which eliminated many of the state’s longtime Republican holdouts in purple or blue-trending seats. Overnight, a 39-14 Democratic advantage ballooned to 46-7. However, California Republicans have since had a surprising resurgence; they’ve gained districts in both the 2020 and 2022 cycles, leading to the state’s current 40-12 split. Five of those Republicans represent districts won by Joe Biden, and three of them represent double-digit Biden seats; meanwhile, Democrats hold no seats won by Trump.
On paper, California’s congressional districts gave Biden a 45-7 advantage, with two of the Trump seats (CA-03 and CA-41) only decided by less than 2%. On the Democratic side, eight districts voted for Biden by 15% or less; this likely represents the upper edge of competitiveness for Republicans. The ceiling for Democrats, then, is likely 47-5, while Republicans would be hard-pressed to win more than 15 districts even in the best of years.
2022 election results
| District | Incumbent | Democratic | Republican | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Doug LaMalfa (R) | 37.9% | 62.1% | R+24.1% |
| 2 | Jared Huffman (D) | 74.4% | 25.6% | D+48.8% |
| 3 | OPEN | 46.4% | 53.7% | R+7.3% |
| 4 | Mike Thompson (D) | 67.8% | 32.2% | D+35.6% |
| 5 | Tom McClintock (R) | 38.7% | 61.3% | R+22.6% |
| 6 | Ami Bera (D) | 56.0% | 44.1% | D+11.9% |
| 7 | Doris Matsui (D) | 68.3% | 31.7% | D+36.5% |
| 8 | John Garamendi (D) | 75.7% | 24.3% | D+51.5% |
| 9 | OPEN | 54.8% | 45.2% | D+9.6% |
| 10 | Mark DeSaulnier (D) | 78.9% | 0.0% | D+78.9% |
| 11 | Nancy Pelosi (D) | 84.0% | 16.1% | D+67.9% |
| 12 | Barbara Lee (D) | 90.5% | 9.5% | D+80.9% |
| 13 | OPEN | 49.8% | 50.2% | R+0.4% (FLIP) |
| 14 | Eric Swalwell (D) | 69.3% | 30.7% | D+38.7% |
| 15 | OPEN | 100.0% | 0.0% | N/A |
| 16 | Anna Eshoo (D) | 100.0% | 0.0% | N/A |
| 17 | Ro Khanna (D) | 70.9% | 29.1% | D+41.9% |
| 18 | Zoe Lofgren (D) | 65.9% | 34.2% | D+31.7% |
| 19 | Jimmy Panetta (D) | 68.7% | 31.4% | D+37.3% |
| 20 | Kevin McCarthy (R) | 32.8% | 67.3% | R+34.5% |
| 21 | Jim Costa (D) | 54.2% | 45.8% | D+8.4% |
| 22 | David Valadao (R) | 48.5% | 51.5% | R+3.0% |
| 23 | Jay Obernolte (R) | 39.0% | 61.0% | R+22.1% |
| 24 | Salud Carbajal (D) | 60.6% | 39.4% | D+21.1% |
| 25 | Raul Ruiz (D) | 57.4% | 42.6% | D+14.8% |
| 26 | Julia Brownley (D) | 54.5% | 45.5% | D+9.1% |
| 27 | Mike Garcia (R) | 46.8% | 53.2% | R+6.5% |
| 28 | Judy Chu (D) | 66.2% | 33.8% | D+32.5% |
| 29 | Tony Cárdenas (D) | 100.0% | 0.0% | N/A |
| 30 | Adam Schiff (D) | 100.0% | 0.0% | N/A |
| 31 | Grace Napolitano (D) | 59.5% | 40.5% | D+19.1% |
| 32 | Brad Sherman (D) | 69.2% | 30.8% | D+38.3% |
| 33 | Pete Aguilar (D) | 57.7% | 42.3% | D+15.4% |
| 34 | Jimmy Gomez (D) | 100.0% | 0.0% | N/A |
| 35 | Norma Torres (D) | 57.4% | 42.6% | D+14.7% |
| 36 | Ted Lieu (D) | 69.8% | 30.3% | D+39.5% |
| 37 | OPEN | 100.0% | 0.0% | N/A |
| 38 | Linda Sánchez (D) | 58.1% | 41.9% | D+16.2% |
| 39 | Mark Takano (D) | 57.7% | 42.3% | D+15.3% |
| 40 | Young Kim (R) | 43.2% | 56.8% | R+13.7% |
| 41 | Ken Calvert (R) | 47.7% | 52.3% | R+4.7% |
| 42 | OPEN | 68.4% | 31.6% | D+36.7% |
| 43 | Maxine Waters (D) | 77.3% | 22.7% | D+54.7% |
| 44 | Nanette Barragán (D) | 72.2% | 27.8% | D+44.4% |
| 45 | Michelle Steel (R) | 47.6% | 52.4% | R+4.8% |
| 46 | Lou Correa (D) | 61.8% | 38.2% | D+23.6% |
| 47 | Katie Porter (D) | 51.7% | 48.3% | D+3.4% |
| 48 | Darrell Issa (R) | 39.6% | 60.4% | R+20.7% |
| 49 | Mike Levin (D) | 52.6% | 47.4% | D+5.3% |
| 50 | Scott Peters (D) | 62.8% | 37.2% | D+25.7% |
| 51 | Sara Jacobs (D) | 61.9% | 38.1% | D+23.7% |
| 52 | Juan Vargas (D) | 66.7% | 33.3% | D+33.3% |
Republicans gained in the 2022 midterm, flipping a district while holding all of the others. In fact, the state experienced something of a minor red wave, with Republicans making broad gains across the state – albeit much of them contained within safely Democratic urban districts. In all but a handful of districts, Republican candidates managed to improve on Trump’s 2020 performance.
It’s worth noting that in seven districts, Republicans did not have a candidate in the general election due to California’s top-two system, resulting in either Democrat vs. Democrat races or, in the case of CA-10, a Democrat vs. Green Party race. Because of this, the popular vote is skewed more towards the Democratic Party than it might otherwise be; most statewide races ended in the ~D+20 range.
Republicans managed to flip the majority-Hispanic 13th district, which voted for Biden by 11% in 2020. This victory left Jim Costa of Fresno as the only Democratic member of Congress from the Central Valley. Republicans also held competitive Biden-won seats like the 22nd (Biden+13), 27th (Biden+12), and 46th (Biden+6). Four of the Republican-won districts were decided by less than 5%; it remains to be seen if any will flip in a year more Democratic than 2022 was.
On the other hand, Republican gains weren’t as sweeping as they hoped; both of Orange County’s competitive Democratic-held seats, CA-47 (Porter+3.4) and CA-49 (Levin+5.3), remained in Democratic hands, while a longshot bid in Julia Brownley’s CA-26 (Brownlee+9.1) fell well short of a victory. Democrat Josh Harder, meanwhile won the Stockton-based CA-09 by a wider-than-expected double-digit margin.
Current Representatives
- CA-01: Doug LaMalfa (R-Oroville)
- CA-02: Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael)
- CA-03: Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin)
- CA-04: Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena)
- CA-05: Tom McClintock (R-Elk Grove)
- CA-06: Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove)
- CA-07: Doris Matsui (D-Sacramento)
- CA-08: John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove)
- CA-09: Josh Harder (D-Tracy)
- CA-10: Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord)
- CA-11: Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco)
- CA-12: Barbara Lee (D-Oakland)
- CA-13: John Duarte (R-Modesto)
- CA-14: Eric Swalwell (D-Livermore)
- CA-15: Kevin Mullin (D-South San Francisco)
- CA-16: Anna Eshoo (D-Atherton)
- CA-17: Ro Khonna (D-Fremont)
- CA-18: Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose)
- CA-19: Jimmy Panetta (D-Carmel Valley)
- CA-20: Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield)
- CA-21: Jim Costa (D-Fresno)
- CA-22: David Valadao (R-Hanford)
- CA-23: Jay Obernolte (R-Big Bear Lake)
- CA-24: Salud Carbajal (D-Santa Barbara)
- CA-25: Raul Ruiz (D-Indio)
- CA-26: Julia Brownley (D-Westlake Village)
- CA-27: Mike Garcia (R-Santa Clarita)
- CA-28: Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park)
- CA-29: Tony Cárdenas (D-Pacoima)
- CA-30: Adam Schiff (D-Burbank)
- CA-31: Grace Napolitano (D-Norwalk)
- CA-32: Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks)
- CA-33: Pete Aguilar (D-Redlands)
- CA-34: Jimmy Gomez (D-Los Angeles)
- CA-35: Norma Torres (D-Pomona)
- CA-36: Ted Lieu (D-Torrance)
- CA-37: Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles)
- CA-38: Linda Sánchez (D-Whittier)
- CA-39: Mark Takano (D-Riverside)
- CA-40: Young Kim (R-La Habra)
- CA-41: Ken Calvert (R-Corona)
- CA-42: Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach)
- CA-43: Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles)
- CA-44: Nanette Barragán (D-Los Angeles)
- CA-45: Michelle Steel (R-Surfside)
- CA-46: Lou Correa (D-Santa Anna)
- CA-47: Katie Porter (D-Irvine)
- CA-48: Darrell Issa (R-San Diego)
- CA-49: Mike Levin (D-San Juan Capistrano)
- CA-50: Scott Peters (D-San Diego)
- CA-51: Sara Jacobs (D-San Diego)
- CA-52: Juan Vargas (D-San Diego)
