Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:51:28.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing the Partisan Effects of Redistricting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 1985

Bruce E. Cain
Bruce E. Cain*
Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to assess the reality behind the politician's perception that redistricting matters. There are, of course, many dimensions to that perception, because redistricting has many effects. This articles focuses on the impact of boundary changes on the partisan composition of seats. In order to do this, it will be necessary to specify what the expected partisan effects of redistricting are and how they can be measured. Thus, I first explain how the impact of redistricting will vary with the strategy of particular plans and then explore some techniques for measuring the partisan impact of boundary changes. I conclude with a detailed analysis of the most important congressional redistricting in 1982—the Burton plan in California.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 79 , Issue 2 , June 1985 , pp. 320 - 333
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bicker, W. The effects of malapportionment in the states: A mistrial. In Polsby, N. (Ed.). Reapportionment in the 1970's. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971.Google Scholar
Bullock, C. Redistricting and congressional stability, 1962-72. Journal of Politics, 1975, 37, 569–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cain, B. E. The reapportionment puzzle. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984.Google Scholar
Cain, B. E., & Kiewiet, D. R. Ethnicity and electoral choice: Mexican-American voting behavior in the California 30th congressional district. Social Science Quarterly, 1984, 65, 315–327.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. G. Jr. Democratic representation and reapportionment in law and politics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1968.Google Scholar
Erikson, R. Malapportionment, gerrymandering and party fortunes in congressional elections. American Political Science Review, 1972, 66, 1234–1245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferejohn, J. The decline of competition in congressional elections. American Political Science Review, 1977, 71, 166–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, M. Congress: Keystone of the Washington establishment. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Fiorina, M. The case of the vanishing marginals: The bureaucracy did it. American Political Science Review, 1977, 71, 177–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, D. Congressional elections—the case of the vanishing marginals. Polity, 1974, 6, 295–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, D. Congressional representation: Theory and practice in drawing the districts. In Polsby, N. (Ed.). Reapportionment in the seventies. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971.Google Scholar
O'Rourke, T. C. The impact of reapportionment. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1980.Google Scholar
Saffel, D. The policy consequences of reapportionment. In Grofman, B., McKay, R., & Scarrow, H. (Eds.). Representation and redistricting issues in the 1980's. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1982.Google Scholar
Tufte, E. R. The relationship between seats and votes in two-party systems. American Political Science Review, 1973, 67, 540–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.