How do traditional redistricting principles—contiguity, communities of interest, political subdivisions, incumbent protection, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, preservation of district core, and compactness—affect racial minority representation in congressional districts? Using data from the 2001–02 redistricting process, we find that compactness is the only principle that significantly affects minority representation, both in terms of majority-minority districts and minority influence districts, but these effects are contingent on the size of the minority community and extent of racial segregation in a state. Two other principles, Section 5 pre-clearance and protecting political subdivisions, improve minority representation in a more limited way. Thus, race-neutral redistricting criteria like the compactness principle, can dramatically affect the racial composition of the resulting districts and, thereby, affect minority representation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbramsonPaul R.AldrichJohn H.RohdeDavid W.. 2002. Change and Continuity in the 2000 Elections. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
2.
AltmanMicah. 1998a. “Modeling the Effect of Mandatory District Compactness on Partisan Gerrymanders.” Political Geography17:989–1012.
3.
AltmanMicah. 1998b. “Districting Principles and Democratic Representation.” Ph.D. diss. California Institute of Technology.
4.
BaroneMichaelCohenRichard E.CookCharles E.Jr.2001. The Almanac of American Politics 2002. Washington, DC: National Journal.
5.
BraceKimballGrofmanBernardHandleyLisaNiemiRichard. 1988. “Minority Voting Equality: The 65 Percent Rule in Theory and Practice.” Law and Policy10: 43–62.
6.
BullockCharles S.III. 1995. “Affirmative Action Districts: In Whose Faces Will They Blow Up?” Campaigns and Elections16(4):22–3.
7.
ButlerDavidCainBruce. 1992. Congressional Redistricting: Comparative Theories and Perspectives. New York: Macmillan.
8.
CanonDavid T.1999. Race, Redistricting, and Representation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
CameronCharlesEpsteinDavidO'HalloranSharyn. 1996. “Do Majority-Minority Districts Maximize Substantive Black Representation in Congress?” American Political Science Review90:794–812.
10.
CohenJacob. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Social Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
DavidsonChandler. 1992. “The Voting Rights Act: A Brief History.” In Controversies in Minority Voting, eds. GrofmanBernardDavidsonChandler. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
12.
Easley v. Cromartie. 2001. 532 U.S. 234.
13.
EngstromRichard L.1995. “Voting Rights Districts: Debunking the Myths.” Campaigns and Elections16(4):24, 46.
14.
EngstromRichard N.AlfordJohn R.. 2002. “A New Approach to Measuring District Compactness.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
15.
FlaniganWilliam H.ZingaleNancy H.. 1998. Political Behavior of the American Electorate. 9th ed.Washington, DC: CQ Press.
16.
GrofmanBernardHandleyLisa. 1989. “Minority Population and Black and Hispanic Congressional Success in the 1970s and 1980s.” American Politics Quarterly17: 436–45.
17.
GrofmanBernardHandleyLisa. 1998. “Estimating the Impact of Voting-Rights-Related Districting on Democratic Strength in the U.S. House of Representatives.” In Race and Redistricting in the 1990s, ed. GrofmanBernard. New York: Agathon Press.
18.
GrofmanBernardHandleyLisaLublinDavid. 2001. “Drawing Effective Minority Districts: A Conceptual Framework and Some Empirical Evidence.” North Carolina Law Review79:1383–430.
19.
HarrisonRoderick J.WeinbergDaniel H.. 1992. “Racial and Ethnic Residential Segregation in 1990.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, Denver, CO.
20.
HawkingsDavidNuttingBrian. 2004. Politics in America 2004: The 108th Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
21.
HirschSam. 2002. “Unpacking Page v. Bartels: A Fresh Redistricting Paradigm Emerges in New Jersey.” Election Law Journal1:7–24.
22.
JeritJenniferGottemollerPaulBarabasJason. 2003. “U.S. Redistricting Standards: A Protocol for Data Collection.” Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. Unpublished manuscript.
23.
KingGary. 1989. Unifying Political Methodology: The Likelihood Theory of Statistical Inference. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
24.
KingGaryTomzMichaelWittenbergJason. 2000. “Making the Most of Statistical Analyses: Improving Interpretation and Presentation.” American Journal of Political Science44:347–61.
25.
LongJ. Scott. 1997. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. London: Sage Publications.
26.
LongJ. ScottFreeseJeremy. 2001. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata.
27.
LowensteinDaniel H.SteinbergJonathan. 1985. “The Quest for Legislative Districting in the Public Interest: Elusive or Illusory?” UCLA Law Review33:1–75.
28.
LublinDavid. 1997. The Paradox of Representation: Racial Gerrymandering and Minority Interests in Congress. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
LublinDavid. 1999. “Racial Redistricting and African American Representation: A Critique of ‘Do Majority Districts Maximize Substantive Black Representation in Congress?'’.” American Political Science Review93:183–96.
30.
McDonaldMichael D.1996. “The Why and How of Compact Districts.” American Review of Politics17:329–43.
31.
McDonaldMichael P.2004. “A Comparative Analysis of Redistricting Institutions in the United States, 2001–02.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly4:371–95.
32.
Miller v. Johnson. 1995. 515 U.S. 900.
33.
NiemiRichard G.GrofmanBernardCarlucciCarlHofellerThomas. 1990. “Measuring Compactness and the Role of a Compactness Standard in a Test for Partisan and Racial Gerrymandering.” Journal of Politics52:1155–81.
34.
Page v. Batels. 2001. 248 F3d 175.
35.
PetrocikJohn R.DesposatoScott W.. 1998. “The Partisan Consequences of Majority Minority Redistricting in the South, 1992 and 1994.” Journal of Politics60:613–33.
36.
PildesRichard H.NiemiRichard G.. 1993. “Expressive Harms, ‘Bizarre Districts,’ and Voting Rights: Evaluating Election-District Appearances after Shaw v. Reno.” Michigan Law Review92:483–587.
37.
PolsbyDaniel D.PopperRobert D.. 1991. “Ugly: An Inquiry into the Problem of Racial Gerrymandering under the Voting Rights Act.” Michigan Law Review92: 588–651.
38.
Shaw v. Reno. 1993. 509 U.S. 630.
39.
ShottsKenneth W.2003. “Does Racial Redistricting Cause Conservative Policy Outcomes? Policy Preferences of Southern Representatives in the 1980s and 1990s.” Journal of Politics65:216–23.
40.
SlackBrianRodrigueJean-Paul. 2004. “Gini Coefficient.” In Transport Geography on the Web, eds. RodrigueJean-PaulSlackBrianComtoisClaude. Hofstra University, Department of Economics & Geography. http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans (accessed April 21, 2004).
41.
SternRobert. 1974. “Political Gerrymandering: A Statutory Compactness Standard as an Antidote for Judicial Impotence.” University of Chicago Law Review41:398–416.
42.
SwainCarol M.1995. Black Faces, Black Interests: The Representation of African Americans in Congress. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
