Competing Criteria: Rethinking Congressional Redistricting and Representation.
Congressional redistricting requires institutions to make decisions about which criteria they will use to draw new district boundaries. These decisions unavoidably prioritize certain criteria at the expense of other criteria. Further, the competitive nature of redistricting criteria also means that...
| Publicado en: | Political Research Quarterly Vol. 77; no. 4; pp. 1431 - 1454 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Sage Publications Inc.
Dec2024
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=180764749&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 180764749 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 10659129 PTQ jtl: Political Research Quarterly issn: 10659129 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Dec2024 vid: 77 iid: 4 pid: 344 pub: Sage Publications Inc. artinfo: ui: 180764749 10.1177/10659129241279084 ppf: 1431 ppct: 23 formats: tig: atl: Competing Criteria: Rethinking Congressional Redistricting and Representation. aug: au: Hayes, Sam D. affil: 3757 Trinity College, Hartford, CT, USA su: Federal courts Congressional apportionment Apportionment (Election law) State courts Array processing sug: subj: Federal courts Federal courts of law Congressional apportionment Apportionment (Election law) State courts Array processing keyword: congressional redistricting gerrymandering redistricting redistricting criteria redistricting institutions representation congressional redistricting gerrymandering redistricting redistricting criteria redistricting institutions representation ab: Congressional redistricting requires institutions to make decisions about which criteria they will use to draw new district boundaries. These decisions unavoidably prioritize certain criteria at the expense of other criteria. Further, the competitive nature of redistricting criteria also means that when institutions use certain criteria at the expense of others, they are also correlating with certain forms of group representation at the expense of others. This paper argues that the representational consequences of redistricting are best understood through an approach that accounts for this process and the full array of redistricting institutions and criteria. Using a novel research design and an extensive data set covering six decades of redistricting cycles, this paper supports these claims with empirical evidence describing the relationships of seven categories of redistricting institutions with a wide range of criteria. This paper finds that partisan legislatures, bipartisan legislatures, and political commissions facilitate partisan group representation; state courts facilitate geographic group representation; federal courts facilitate racial and ethnic group representation; and independent commissions facilitate both geographic and racial/ethnic group representation. These findings emphasize that Americans are categorized and grouped differently during congressional redistricting depending on who is drawing the lines. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|