Are mapmakers able to target and protect congressional incumbents?: The institutional dynamics of electoral competition

American Politics Research

Volumn 37, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 955-982

  Murphy, Chad ^a   Yoshinaka, Antoine ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Apportionment; Congressional elections; Dynamic redistricting thesis; Electoral competition; Gerrymandering; Incumbency; Redistricting; Representation

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350663012     PISSN: 1532673X     EISSN: 15523373     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X08326385     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abramowitz, A.I. (1983). Partisan redistricting and the 1982 congressional elections. Journal of Politics, 45, 767-770.
2. Abramowitz, A.I., Alexander, B., & Gunning, M. (2006a). Don't blame redistricting for uncompetitive elections. PS: Political Science & Politics, 39, 87-90.
3. Abramowitz, A.I., Alexander, B., & Gunning, M. (2006b). Incumbency, redistricting, and the decline of competition in U.S. House elections. Journal of Politics, 68, 75-88.
4. Ai, C., & Norton, E.C. (2003). Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Economics Letters, 80, 123-129.
5. Ansolabehere, S., & Snyder, J.M., Jr. (2002). The incumbency advantage in U.S. elections: An analysis of state and federal offices, 1942-2000. Election Law Journal, 1, 315-338.
6. Ansolabehere, S., Snyder, J.M., Jr., & Stewart, C., III. (2000). Old voters, new voters, and the personal vote: Using redistricting to measure the incumbency advantage. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 17-34.
7. Barone, M., & Cohen, R.E. (2003). The almanac of American politics 2004. Washington, DC: National Journal.
8. Black, G.S. (1972). A theory of political ambition: Career choices and the role of structural incentives. American Political Science Review, 66, 144-159.
9. Box-Steffensmeier, J.M. (1996). A dynamic analysis of the role of war chests in campaign strategy. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 352-371.
10. Cain, B.E., Ferejohn, J.A., & Fiorina, M.P. (1987). The personal vote: Constituency service and electoral independence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Carson, J.L. (2003). Strategic interaction and candidate competition in U.S. House elections: Empirical applications of probit and strategic probit models. Political Analysis, 11, 368-380.
12. Carson, J.L. (2005). Strategy, selection, and candidate competition in U.S. House and Senate elections. Journal of Politics, 67, 1-28.
13. Carson, J.L., & Crespin, M.H. (2004). The effect of state redistricting methods on electoral competition in United States House of Representatives races. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 4, 455-469.
14. Carson, J.L., Engstrom, E.J., & Roberts, J.M. (2006). Redistricting, candidate entry, and the politics of nineteenth-century U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science, 50, 283-293.
15. Congressional Quarterly. (1973). Congressional districts in the 1970s. Washington, DC: Author.
16. Congressional Quarterly. (1983). Congressional districts in the 1980s. Washington, DC: Author.
17. Congressional Quarterly. (1993). Congressional districts in the 1990s: A portrait of America. Washington, DC: Author.
18. Cox, G.W., & Katz, J.N. (2002). Elbridge Gerry's Salamander: The electoral consequences of the reapportionment revolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. Crespin, M.H. (2005). Using geographic information systems to measure district change, 2000-2002. Political Analysis, 13, 253-260.
20. Dahl, R.A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
21. Desposato, S.W., & Petrocik, J.R. (2003). The variable incumbency advantage: New Voters, redistricting, and the personal vote. American Journal of Political Science, 47, 18-32.
22. Gelman, A., & King, G. (1994). Enhancing democracy through legislative redistricting. American Political Science Review, 88, 541-559.
23. Glazer, A., Grofman, B., & Robbins, M. (1987). Partisan and incumbency effects of 1970s congressional redistricting. American Journal of Political Science, 31, 680-707.
24. Griffin, J.D. (2006). Electoral competition and democratic responsiveness: A defense of the marginality hypothesis. Journal of Politics, 68, 911-921.
25. Grofman, B., & Brunell, T.L. (2005). The art of the dummymander: The impact of recent redistrictings on the Partisan makeup of southern house seats. In P. F. Galderisi (Ed.), Redistricting in the new millennium (pp. 183-199). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
26. Hetherington, M.J., Larson, B., & Globetti, S. (2003). The redistricting cycle and strategic candidate decisions in U.S. House races. Journal of Politics, 65, 1221-1234.
27. Jacobson, G.C. (1987). The marginals never vanished: Incumbency and competition in elections to the U.S. House of Representatives, 1952-82. American Journal of Political Science, 31, 126-141.
28. Jacobson, G.C. (1989). Strategic politicians and the dynamics of U.S. House Elections, 1946-86. American Political Science Review, 83, 773-793.
29. Jacobson, G.C. (2003). Terror, terrain, and turnout: Explaining the 2002 midterm elections. Political Science Quarterly, 118, 1-22.
30. Jacobson, G.C., & Kernell, S. (1981). Strategy and choice in congressional elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
31. Kahn, K.F., & Kenney, P.J. (1999). The spectacle of U.S. Senate campaigns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32. Kam, C.K. (2006). Political campaigns and open-minded thinking. Journal of Politics, 68, 931-945.
33. King, G. (1989). Representation through legislative redistricting: A stochastic model. American Journal of Political Science, 33, 787-824.
34. King, G., Tomz, M., & Wittenberg, J. (2000). Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 347-361.
35. Lublin, D., & McDonald, M.P. (2006). Is it time to draw the line? The impact of redistricting on competition in state house elections. Election Law Journal, 5, 144-157.
36. Lyons, M., & Galderisi, P.F. (1995). Incumbency, reapportionment, and U.S. House redistricting. Political Research Quarterly, 48, 857-871.
37. Maestas, C.D., Fulton, S., Maisel, L.S., & Stone, W.J. (2006). When to risk it? Institutions, ambitions, and the decision to run for the U.S. House. American Political Science Review, 100, 195-208.
38. Maisel, L.S., Maestas, C.D., & Stone, W.J. (2005). The impact of redistricting on candidate emergence. In T. E. Mann & B. E. Cain (Eds.), Party lines: Competition, partisanship, and congressional redistricting (pp. 31-50). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
39. McDonald, M.P. (2004). A comparative analysis of redistricting institutions in the United States, 2001-02. State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 4, 371-395.
40. McDonald, M.P. (2006a). Drawing the line on district competition. PS: Political Science & Politics, 39, 91-94.
41. McDonald, M.P. (2006b). Re-drawing the line on district competition. PS: Political Science & Politics, 39, 99-102.
42. Mercurio, J. (2002, March 11). Between the lines. Roll call.
43. Niemi, R.G., & Abramowitz, A.I. (1994). Partisan redistricting and the 1992 congressional elections. Journal of Politics, 56, 811-817.
44. Niemi, R.G., & Winsky, L.R. (1992). The persistence of partisan redistricting effects in congressional elections in the 1970s and 1980s. Journal of Politics, 54, 565-572.
45. Norton, E.C., Wang, H., & Ai, C. (2004). Computing interaction effects and standard errors in logit and probit models. Stata Journal, 4, 154-167.
46. Owen, G., & Grofman, B.N. (1988). Optimal partisan gerrymandering. Political Geography Quarterly, 7, 5-22.
47. Schumpeter, J.A. (1976). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York: Harper & Row.
48. Squire, P. (1985). Results of partisan redistricting in seven U.S. states during the 1970s. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 10, 259-266.
49. Squire, P. (1995). The partisan consequences of congressional redistricting. American Politics Quarterly, 23, 229-240.
50. Stein, R.M., & Bickers, K.N. (1995). Perpetuating the pork barrel: Policy subsystems and American democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
51. Stone, W.J., & Maisel, L.S. (2003). The not-so-simple calculus of winning: Potential U.S. House candidates' nomination and general election prospects. Journal of Politics, 65, 951-977.
52. Sulkin, T. (2005). Issue politics in Congress. New York: Cambridge University Press.
53. Swain, J.W., Borrelli, S.A., & Reed, B.C. (1998). Partisan consequences of the post-1990 redistricting for the U.S. House of Representatives. Political Research Quarterly, 51, 945-967.
54. Tomz, M., Wittenberg, J., & King, G. (2003, January). CLARIFY: Software for interpreting and presenting statistical results. Version 2.1. Stanford University, University of Wisconsin, and Harvard University. Retrieved November 1, 2007, from http://gking.harvard.edu/.
55. Tufte, E.R. (1973). The relationship between seats and votes in two-party systems. American Political Science Review, 67, 540-554.