Montana is unique among the states that gained a seat from reapportionment in that it will only have two seats in Congress. With only two districts, there is limited room for playing games with district lines — every move to make one district safer makes the other district less safe. By contrast, as the number of districts grow, it’s possible to offset big changes in one district with small changes in multiple districts. In other words, while it’s possible to pack (putting a lot of members of the other party in a small number of districts) and crack (splitting potential pockets of support for other parties among multiple districts) when you have a large number of districts, you have to either pack or crack when you have two districts. Simply put, the choice is do you have two roughly similar districts (with the majority party favored in both by cracking the supporters of the other voters among two districts) or do you go for one safer district and one somewhat vulnerable district (with the supporters of the minority party packed into one district).
The other thing about the small states is that they fall into two categories. Some states (like Utah, Nevada, Oregon, and Kansas) have significant metropolitan areas that are large enough to be the base of one or more districts. Other states like Mississippi and Iowa really lack one metropolitan area that is large enough to be the base of a district. Montana falls into this latter category.
In looking at potential maps, I did two alternatives. One was a basic east-west divide somewhat similar to the way that Montana did when they used to have two districts. While the exact borders can be adjusted. A basic east-west divide will lead to one safe Republican district and one safe-lean Republican district depending on how aggressive the legislature is in moving Democrats into the western District (which would be the Democrats best chances at winning a district). You get the same thing with a basic north-south divide. To get a Democratic district requires something of a jagged semi-circle with tentacles reaching out to connect the Democratic pockets of the state and counter-tentacles reaching the reddest parts of the southwestern part of the state. Since the state as a whole is safe Republican (around 53-42), it is much easier for the Republicans to get two districts than for Democrats to get a real chance at splitting the two districts.
Technically, redistricting is controlled by a five-member commission. Of that commission, two members will be Democrats and two Republicans with these commissioners picking the fifth-member. If they are unable to pick a fifth-member, the state Supreme Court picks the fifth member. Given this make-up, I doubt that the commission will do the aggressive line-drawing that is needed to get a lean Democrat seat. I am seeing a swing-lean Republican seat and a lean-safe Republican seat.
Since West Virginia is losing a seat, the switch of that seat from West Virginia to Montana will probably be a wash — the Republicans losing a seat in West Virginia (as all three representatives from West Virginia are currently Republicans) but likely gaining the seat in Montana. Up next is Colorado.
