Partisan gerrymandering and population instability: Completing the redistricting puzzle

Political Geography

Volumn 28, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 451-462

  Yoshinaka, Antoine ^a   Murphy, Chad ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARY WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Congress; Gerrymandering; Incumbency; Partisanship; Population instability; Redistricting

Indexed keywords

ELECTION; ELECTORAL GEOGRAPHY; PARTY POLITICS; POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY; POLITICAL SYSTEM; POPULATION DYNAMICS;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 74649084136     PISSN: 09626298     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2009.10.011     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Abramowitz A.I., Alexander B., and Gunning M. Incumbency, redistricting, and the decline of competition in U.S. house elections. Journal of Politics 68 (2006) 75-88
2. Altman M., MacDonald K., and McDonald M. From crayons to computers: the evolution of computer use in redistricting. Social Science Computer Review 23 (2005) 334-346
3. Ansolabehere S., Snyder Jr. J.M., and Stewart III C. Old voters, new voters, and the personal vote: using redistricting to measure the incumbency advantage. American Journal of Political Science 44 (2000) 17-34
4. Barone M., and Cohen R.E. The almanac of American politics 2004 (2003), National Journal Group, Washington, D.C p. 454
5. Bertelli, A. M., & Carson, J. L. (2006). Constituency effects, redistricting, and representation in U.S. House Elections. APSA paper.
6. Born R. Partisan intentions and election day realities in the congressional redistricting process. American Political Science Review 79 (1985) 305-319
7. Brambor T., Clark W.R., and Golder M. Understanding interaction models: improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis 14 (2006) 63-82
8. Braumoeller B. Hypothesis testing and multiplicative interaction terms. International Organization 58 (2004) 807-820
9. Brunell T.L. Rethinking redistricting: how drawing uncompetitive districts eliminates gerrymanders, enhances representation, and improves attitudes toward congress. PS: Political Science & Politics 39 (2006) 77-86
10. Brunell T.L. Redistricting and competition: Why competitive elections are bad for America (2008), Routledge, New York
11. Buchler J. Competition, representation and redistricting: the case against competitive congressional districts. Journal of Theoretical Politics 17 (2005) 431-463
12. Buchler J. The social sub-optimality of competitive elections. Public Choice 133 (2007) 439-456
13. Burnham W.D. Congressional representation: theory and practice of drawing the districts. In: Polsby N.W. (Ed). Reapportionment in the 1970s (1971), University of California Press, Berkeley
14. Butler D., and Cain B.E. Congressional redistricting: Comparative and theoretical perspectives (1992), Macmillan, New York pp. 102-103
15. Cain B.E. The reapportionment puzzle (1984), University of California Press, Berkeley
16. Cain B.E. Assessing the partisan effects of redistricting. American Political Science Review 79 (1985) 320-333
17. Cain B.E., and Campagna J.C. Predicting partisan redistricting disputes. Legislative Studies Quarterly 12 (1987) 265-274
18. Cain B.E., Ferejohn J.A., and Fiorina M.P. The personal vote: Constituency service and electoral independence (1987), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
19. Cain B.E., Mac Donald K., and McDonald M. From equality to fairness: the path of political reform since Baker v. Carr. In: Mann T.E., and Cain B.E. (Eds). Party lines: Competition, partisanship, and congressional redistricting (2005), Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
20. Campagna J., and Grofman B. Party control and partisan bias in the 1980s congressional redistricting. Journal of Politics 52 (1990) 1242-1257
21. Carson J.L., Crespin M.H., Finocchiaro C.J., and Rohde D.W. Redistricting and party polarization in the U.S. house of representatives. American Politics Research 35 (2007) 878-904
22. Carson J.L., Engstrom E.J., and Roberts J.M. Redistricting, candidate entry, and the politics of nineteenth-century U.S. house elections. American Journal of Political Science 50 (2006) 283-293
23. Chamberlin J.R. The republicans take control: the 2001 redistricting in michigan. In: Galderisi P.F. (Ed). Redistricting in the new millennium (2005), Lexington Books, Lanham, MD 215
24. Cox A.B. Designing redistricting institutions. Election Law Journal 5 (2006) 412-424
25. Cox G.W., and Katz J.N. Elbridge Gerry's Salamander: The electoral consequences of the reapportionment revolution (2002), Cambridge University Press, New York
26. Crespin M.H. Using geographic information systems to measure district change, 2000-2002. Political Analysis 13 (2005) 253-260
27. Crespin, M. H. (2007). Replication data for: Using Geographic Systems to Measure District Change, 2000-02. Michael Crespin [Distributor].
28. Crespin, M. H. Serving Two Masters: Redistricting and Voting in the U.S. House of Representatives. Political Research Quarterly, in press.
29. Dahl R.A. Polyarchy: Participation and opposition (1971), Yale University Press, New Haven
30. Desposato S.W., and Petrocik J.R. The variable incumbency advantage: new voters, redistricting, and the personal vote. American Journal of Political Science 47 (2003) 18-32
31. Engstrom E.J. Stacking the states, stacking the house: the partisan consequences of congressional redistricting in the 19th century. American Political Science Review 100 (2006) 419-427
32. Farber, H., & Cook, R. (2001). Democrats' redistricting upsets Republicans. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11 October, 2001, 1JM.
33. Fenno Jr. R.F. Home style: House members in their districts (1978), Little, Brown, Boston p. 1
34. Fenno Jr. R.F. Congress at the grassroots: Representational change in the south, 1970-1998 (2000), University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill
35. Fenno Jr. R.F. Congressional travels: Places, connections, and authenticity (2007), Pearson/Longman, New York p. 169
36. Forgette R., and Platt G. Redistricting principles and incumbency protection in the U.S. congress. Political Geography 24 (2005) 934-951
37. Forgette R., and Winkle III J.W. Partisan gerrymandering and the voting rights act. Social Science Quarterly 87 (2006) 155-173
38. Gelman A., and King G. Enhancing democracy through legislative redistricting. American Political Science Review 88 (1994) 541-559
39. Glazer A., Grofman B., and Robbins M. Partisan and incumbency effects of 1970s congressional redistricting. American Journal of Political Science 31 (1987) 680-707
40. Gopoian J.D., and West D.M. Trading security for seats: strategic considerations in the redistricting process. Journal of Politics 46 (1984) 1080-1096
41. Grofman B., and Brunell T.L. The art of the dummymander: the impact of recent redistrictings on the partisan makeup of southern house seats. In: Galderisi P.F. (Ed). Redistricting in the new millennium (2005), Lexington Books, Lanham, MD
42. Hayes D., and McKee S.C. The participatory effects of redistricting. American Journal of Political Science 53 (2009) 1006-1023
43. Hetherington M.J., Larson B., and Globetti S. The redistricting cycle and strategic candidate decisions in U.S. house races. Journal of Politics 65 (2003) 1221-1234
44. Hirsch S. The United States house of unrepresentatives: what went wrong in the latest round of congressional redistricting. Election Law Journal 2 (2003) 179-216
45. Hood III M.V., and McKee S.C. Gerrymandering on Georgia's mind: the effects of redistricting on vote choice in the 2006 midterm election. Social Science Quarterly 8 (2008) 60-77
46. Jacobson G.C. Terror, terrain, and turnout: explaining the 2002 midterm elections. Political Science Quarterly 118 (2003) 1-22
47. Jacobson G.C. Competition in U.S. congressional elections. In: McDonald M.P., and Samples J. (Eds). The marketplace of democracy: Electoral competition and American politics (2006), Brookings Institution Press and Cato Institute, Washington, DC
48. Kiely K. Census forces House members to play 'Survivor': redrawing of U.S. political maps turns colleagues into adversaries. USA Today 18 April (2001) 5A
49. Labunski R.E. James Madison and the struggle for the bill of rights (2006), Oxford University Press, Oxford/New York
50. Lyons M., and Galderisi P.F. Incumbency, reapportionment, and U.S. house redistricting. Political Research Quarterly 48 (1995) 857-871
51. Martis K.C. The original gerrymander. Political Geography 27 (2008) 833-839
52. McDonald M.P. A comparative analysis of redistricting institutions in the United States, 2001-02. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 4 (2004) 371-395
53. McDonald M.P. Drawing the line on district competition. PS: Political Science & Politics 39 (2006) 91-94
54. McDonald M.P. Redistricting and competitive districts. In: McDonald M.P., and Samples J. (Eds). The marketplace of democracy: Electoral competition and American politics (2006), Brookings Institution Press and Cato Institute, Washington, DC
55. McDonald M.P. Legislative redistricting. In: Cain B.E., Donovan T., and Tolbert C.J. (Eds). Democracy in the states: Experiments in electoral reform (2008), Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
56. McDonald M.P., and Samples J. The marketplace of democracy: normative and empirical issues. In: McDonald M.P., and Samples J. (Eds). The marketplace of democracy: Electoral competition and American politics (2006), Brookings Institution Press and Cato Institute, Washington, DC
57. McKee S.C. Redistricting and familiarity with U.S. house candidates. American Politics Research 36 (2008) 962-979
58. McKee S.C. The effects of redistricting on voting behavior in incumbent U.S. house elections, 1992-1994. Political Research Quarterly 61 (2008) 122-133
59. McKee S.C., and Shaw D.R. Redistricting in Texas: institutionalizing republican ascendancy. In: Galderisi P.F. (Ed). Redistricting in the new millennium (2005), Lexington Books, Lanham, MD
60. McKee S.C., Teigen J.M., and Turgeon M. The partisan impact of congressional redistricting: the case of Texas, 2001-2003. Social Science Quarterly 87 (2006) 308-317
61. Murphy C., and Yoshinaka A. Are mapmakers able to target and protect congressional incumbents? The institutional dynamics of electoral competition. American Politics Research 37 (2009) 955-982
62. Owen G., and Grofman B. Optimal partisan gerrymandering. Political Geography 7 (1988) 5-22
63. Pendered, D., & Cook, R. (2001). Creative legislators draw new congressional map. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 11 October, 2001, 1A.
64. Petrocik J.R., and Desposato S.W. The partisan consequences of majority-minority redistricting in the south, 1992 and 1994. Journal of Politics 60 (1998) 613-633
65. Rae D.W. The political consequences of electoral laws (1967), Yale University Press, New Haven
66. Rice T.W. Gubernatorial and senatorial primary elections. American Politics Quarterly 13 (1985) 427-446
67. Rokita T. Why is redistricting important? (2009). http://www.rethinkingredistricting.com/redistricting-process/why-is-redistricting-important.aspx 22.10.09
68. Rush M.E. The variability of partisanship and turnout: implications for gerrymandering analysis and representation theory. American Politics Quarterly 20 (1992) 99-122
69. Rush M.E. Does redistricting make a difference? Partisan representation and electoral behavior (1993), Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London
70. Rush M.E. Redistricting and partisan fluidity: do we really know a gerrymander when we see one?. Political Geography 19 (2000) 249-260
71. Schumpeter J.A. Capitalism, socialism, and democracy (1942), Harper, New York
72. Stratmann T. Congressional voting over legislative careers: shifting positions and changing constraints. American Political Science Review 94 (2000) 665-676
73. Tanner R. Across the country, the fights begin. 13.04.01. The Star-Ledger [Newark] 22 (2001)
74. Thompson D.F. Just elections: Creating a fair electoral process in the United States (2002), University of Chicago Press, Chicago p. 42
75. Winburn J. The realities of redistricting: Following the rules and limiting gerrymandering in state legislative redistricting (2008), Lexington Books, Lanham, MD
76. Yoshinaka, A, & Murphy, C. (In press). The paradox of redistricting: how partisan mapmakers foster competition but disrupt representation. Political Research Quarterly, in press.