Over the past three decades, a number of U.S. cities have shifted from at-large to district-based elections. Some observers argue that this institutional change encourages elected officials to focus on district priorities while ignoring—and perhaps even sacrificing—broader municipal needs. Must district elections bring parochialism and logrolling to city councils? Using seven years’ worth of roll call data from the Los Angeles City Council, we examine the hypothesis that district elections result in vote-trading among its members. Overall, voting behavior on the council appears inconsistent with conventional logrolling accounts and instead points to a strategy of conditional deference on the part of elected officials. The results suggest that district-based elections do not always push elected officials to ignore the general interests of their city.
AustinR. A.2002. “Seats that May Not Matter: Testing for Racial Polarization in U.S. City Councils.” Legislative Studies Quarterly27 (3): 481–508.
2.
BanfieldE. C.WilsonJ. Q.1963. City Politics. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press.
3.
BledsoeT.1986. “A Research Note on the Impact of District/At-Large Elections on Black Political Efficacy.” Urban Affairs Review22 (1): 166–74.
4.
BradburyJ. C.StephensonE. F.2003. “Local Government Structure and Public Expenditure.” Public Choice115: (1–2): 185–98.
5.
BridgesA.1997. Morning Glories: Municipal Reform in the Southwest. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.
6.
DalenbergD. R.Duffy-DenoK. T.1991. “At-Large Versus Ward Elections: Implications for Public Infrastructure.” Public Choice70 (3): 335–42.
7.
DeenerA.ErieS. P.KoganV.StuartF.2013. “Planning Los Angeles: The Changing Politics of Neighborhood and Downtown Development.” In New York and Los Angeles: The Uncertain Future, edited by HalleD.BeveridgeA. A., 385–412. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
8.
ErieS. P.KoganV.MacKenzieS. A.2011. Paradise Plundered: Fiscal Crisis and Governance Failures in San Diego. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.
9.
GilliganT. W.KrehbielK.1987. “Collective Decisionmaking and Standing Committees: An Informational Rationale for Restrictive Amendment Procedures.” Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization3 (2): 287–335.
10.
GilliganT. W.KrehbielK.1989. “Asymmetric Information and Legislative Rules with a Heterogeneous Committee.” American Journal of Political Science33 (2): 459–90.
11.
GilliganT. W.KrehbielK.1990. “Organization of Informative Committees by a Rational Legislature.” American Journal of Political Science34 (2): 531–64.
12.
GlushonR. L.2008. Real Parties’ Joinder in Respondent’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to First Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate and Petition for Writ of Mandate; and Supplemental Opposition. County of Los Angeles: Superior Court of the State of California.
13.
HaselswerdtM. V.1984. “Voter and Candidate Reaction to District and At-Large Elections: Buffalo, New York.” Urban Affairs Review20 (1): 31–45.
14.
IngramJ.2009. “The Rules of the Ruling: Charter Reform in Los Angeles, 1850–2008.” Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of California, San Diego.
15.
International City/County Management Association. 2003. The Municipal Yearbook 2003. Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association.
16.
JonesA. I.2008. Notice Re Court’s Ruling and Order Granting Writ of Mandate. County of Los Angeles: Superior Court of the State of California.
17.
JonesC. B.1976. “The Impact of Local Election Systems on Black Political Representation.” Urban Affairs Review11 (3): 345–56.
18.
KrehbielK.1992. Information and Legislative Organization. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.
19.
LangbeinL. I.CrewsonP.BrasherC. N.1996. “Rethinking Ward and At-Large Elections Cities: Total Spending, the Number of Locations of Selected City Services, and Policy Types.” Public Choice88 (3–4): 275–93.
20.
LubellM.FeiockR. C.RamirezE.2005. “Political Institutions and Conservation by Local Governments.” Urban Affairs Review40 (6): 706–29.
21.
LupiaA.McCubbinsM. D.1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know?Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
22.
MarschallM. J.RuhillA. V.ShahP. R.2010. “The New Racial Calculus: Electoral Institutions and Black Representation in Local Legislatures.” American Journal of Political Science54 (1): 107–24.
23.
MayhewD. R.1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
24.
MehayS. L.GonzalesR. A.1994. “District Elections and the Power of Municipal Employee Unions.” Journal of Labor Research15 (4): 387–402.
25.
MejiaM.2007. First Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate. County of Los Angeles: Superior Court of the State of California.
26.
MorganD. R.PelisseroJ. P.1980. “Urban Policy: Does Political Structure Matter?”American Political Science Review74 (4): 999–1006.
27.
PrimoD. M.SnyderJ. M.2008. “Distributive Politics and the Law of 1/n.” Journal of Politics70 (2): 477–86.
28.
RybickiE.2008. The “Clearance Process” in the Senate and Measures Approved in the 110th Congress Through June 30, 2008. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
29.
ShepsleK. A.WeingastB. R.1981. “Political Preferences for the Pork Barrel: A Generalization.” American Journal of Political Science25 (1): 96–111.
30.
SonensheinR. J.1993. Politics in Black and White: Race and Power in Los Angeles. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.
31.
SouthwickL.Jr.1997. “Local Government Spending and At-Large Versus District Representation.” Economics & Politics9 (2): 173–203.
32.
TrounstineJ.2006. “Dominant Regimes and the Demise of Urban Democracy.” Journal of Politics68 (4): 879–93.
33.
TrounstineJ.2008. Political Monopolies in American Cities: The Rise and Fall of Bosses and Reformers. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
34.
WeingastB. R.1979. “A Rational Choice Perspective on Congressional Norms.” American Journal of Political Science23 (2): 245–62.
35.
WeingastB. R.MarshallW. J.1988. “The Industrial Organization of Congress: Or, Why Legislatures, Like Firms, Are Not Organized as Markets.” Journal of Political Economy96 (1): 132–63.
36.
WeingastB. R.ShepsleK. A.JohnsenC.1981. “The Political Economy of Benefits and Costs: A Neoclassical Approach to Distributive Politics.” Journal of Political Economy89 (4): 642–64.
37.
WelchS.BledsoeT.1988. Urban Reform and Its Consequences: A Study in Representation. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
