The Experts below are selected from a list of 3078 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Richard Holden - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the rising incumbent reelection rate what s Gerrymandering got to do with it
The Journal of Politics, 2009Co-Authors: John N. Friedman, Richard HoldenAbstract:The probability that an incumbent in the U.S. House of Representatives is reelected has risen dramatically over the last half-century; it now stands at nearly 95%. A number of authors and commentators claim that this rise is due to an increase in bipartisan Gerrymandering in favor of incumbents. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we find evidence of the opposite Effect. All else equal, changes in redistricting have reduced the probability of incumbent reelection over time. The timing of this effect is consistent with the hypothesis that legal constraints on Gerrymandering, such as the Voting Rights Act, have become tighter over time. Incumbent Gerrymandering may well be a contributor to incumbent reelection rates, but it is less so than in the past.
-
The Rising Incumbent Reelection Rate: What's Gerrymandering Got to Do With It?
The Journal of Politics, 2009Co-Authors: John N. Friedman, Richard HoldenAbstract:The probability that an incumbent in the U.S. House of Representatives is reelected has risen dramatically over the last half-century; it now stands at nearly 95%. A number of authors and commentators claim that this rise is due to an increase in bipartisan Gerrymandering in favor of incumbents. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we find evidence of the opposite Effect. All else equal, changes in redistricting have reduced the probability of incumbent reelection over time. The timing of this effect is consistent with the hypothesis that legal constraints on Gerrymandering, such as the Voting Rights Act, have become tighter over time. Incumbent Gerrymandering may well be a contributor to incumbent reelection rates, but it is less so than in the past.
-
the rising incumbent advantage what s Gerrymandering got to do with it
2005Co-Authors: John N. Friedman, Richard HoldenAbstract:The probability that an incumbent in the United States House of Representatives is reelected has risen dramatically over the last half-century. It now stands at more than 98%. A number of authors and commentators claim that this rise is due to an increase in bipartisan Gerrymandering in favor of incumbents. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we find evidence of the opposite effect. All else equal, redistricting has reduced the probability of incumbent reelection over time. The timing of this effect is consistent with the hypothesis that constraints on Gerrymandering, such as the Voting Rights Act, have become tighter over time. Incumbent Gerrymandering may well be a contributor to incumbent reelection rates, but it is less so than in the past.
-
The Rising Incumbent Advantage: What's Gerrymandering Got to Do With It?
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2005Co-Authors: John N. Friedman, Richard HoldenAbstract:The probability that an incumbent in the United States House of Representatives is reelected has risen dramatically over the last half-century. It now stands at more than 98%. A number of authors and commentators claim that this rise is due to an increase in bipartisan Gerrymandering in favor of incumbents. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we find evidence of the opposite effect. All else equal, redistricting has reduced the probability of incumbent reelection over time. The timing of this effect is consistent with the hypothesis that constraints on Gerrymandering, such as the Voting Rights Act, have become tighter over time. Incumbent Gerrymandering may well be a contributor to incumbent reelection rates, but it is less so than in the past.
Gary King - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the future of partisan symmetry as a judicial test for partisan Gerrymandering after lulac v perry
2008Co-Authors: Bernard Grofman, Gary KingAbstract:While the Supreme Court in Bandemer v. Davis found partisan Gerrymandering to be justiciable, no challenged redistricting plan in the subsequent 20 years has been held unconstitutional on partisan grounds. Then, in Vieth v. Jubilerer, five justices concluded that some standard might be adopted in a future case, if a manageable rule could be found. When Gerrymandering next came before the Court, in LULAC v. Perry, we along with our colleagues filed an Amicus Brief (King et al., 2005), proposing the test be based in part on the partisan symmetry standard. Although the issue was not resolved, our proposal was discussed and positively evaluated in three of the opinions, including the plurality judgment, and for the first time for any proposal the Court gave a clear indication that a future legal test for partisan Gerrymandering will likely include partisan symmetry. A majority of Justices now appear to endorse the view that the measurement of partisan symmetry may be used in partisan Gerrymandering claims as a helpful (though certainly not talismanic) tool (Justice Stevens, joined by Justice Breyer), provided one recognizes that asymmetry alone is not a reliable measure of unconstitutional partisanship and possibly that the standard would be applied only after at least one election has been held under the redistricting plan at issue (Justice Kennedy, joined by Justices Souter and Ginsburg). We use this essay to respond to the request of Justices Souter and Ginsburg that further attention - be devoted to the administrability of such a criterion at all levels of redistricting and its review. Building on our previous scholarly work, our Amicus Brief, the observations of these five Justices, and a supporting consensus in the academic literature, we offer here a social science perspective on the conceptualization and measurement of partisan Gerrymandering and the development of relevant legal rules based on what is effectively the Supreme Court's open invitation to lower courts to revisit these issues in the light of LULAC v. Perry.
-
the future of partisan symmetry as a judicial test for partisan Gerrymandering after lulac v perry
Election Law Journal, 2007Co-Authors: Bernard Grofman, Gary KingAbstract:While the Supreme Court in Bandemer v. Davis found partisan Gerrymandering to be justiciable, no challenged redistricting plan in the subsequent 20 years has been held unconstitutional on partisan ...
-
Enhancing Democracy Through Legislative Redistricting
American Political Science Review, 1994Co-Authors: Andrew Gelman, Gary KingAbstract:We demonstrate the surprising benefits of legislative redistricting (including partisan Gerrymandering) for American representative democracy. In so doing, our analysis resolves two long-standing controversies in American politics. First, whereas some scholars believe that redistricting reduces electoral responsiveness by protecting incumbents, others, that the relationship is spurious, we demonstrate that both sides are wrong: redistricting increases responsiveness. Second, while some researchers believe that Gerrymandering dramatically increases partisan bias and others deny this effect, we show both sides are in a sense correct. Gerrymandering biases electoral systems in favor of the party that controls the redistricting as compared to what would have happened if the other party controlled it, but any type of redistricting reduces partisan bias as compared to an electoral system without redistricting. Incorrect conclusions in both literatures resulted from misjudging the enormous uncertainties present during redistricting periods, making simplified assumptions about the redistricters' goals, and using inferior statistical methods.
John N. Friedman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the rising incumbent reelection rate what s Gerrymandering got to do with it
The Journal of Politics, 2009Co-Authors: John N. Friedman, Richard HoldenAbstract:The probability that an incumbent in the U.S. House of Representatives is reelected has risen dramatically over the last half-century; it now stands at nearly 95%. A number of authors and commentators claim that this rise is due to an increase in bipartisan Gerrymandering in favor of incumbents. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we find evidence of the opposite Effect. All else equal, changes in redistricting have reduced the probability of incumbent reelection over time. The timing of this effect is consistent with the hypothesis that legal constraints on Gerrymandering, such as the Voting Rights Act, have become tighter over time. Incumbent Gerrymandering may well be a contributor to incumbent reelection rates, but it is less so than in the past.
-
The Rising Incumbent Reelection Rate: What's Gerrymandering Got to Do With It?
The Journal of Politics, 2009Co-Authors: John N. Friedman, Richard HoldenAbstract:The probability that an incumbent in the U.S. House of Representatives is reelected has risen dramatically over the last half-century; it now stands at nearly 95%. A number of authors and commentators claim that this rise is due to an increase in bipartisan Gerrymandering in favor of incumbents. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we find evidence of the opposite Effect. All else equal, changes in redistricting have reduced the probability of incumbent reelection over time. The timing of this effect is consistent with the hypothesis that legal constraints on Gerrymandering, such as the Voting Rights Act, have become tighter over time. Incumbent Gerrymandering may well be a contributor to incumbent reelection rates, but it is less so than in the past.
-
the rising incumbent advantage what s Gerrymandering got to do with it
2005Co-Authors: John N. Friedman, Richard HoldenAbstract:The probability that an incumbent in the United States House of Representatives is reelected has risen dramatically over the last half-century. It now stands at more than 98%. A number of authors and commentators claim that this rise is due to an increase in bipartisan Gerrymandering in favor of incumbents. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we find evidence of the opposite effect. All else equal, redistricting has reduced the probability of incumbent reelection over time. The timing of this effect is consistent with the hypothesis that constraints on Gerrymandering, such as the Voting Rights Act, have become tighter over time. Incumbent Gerrymandering may well be a contributor to incumbent reelection rates, but it is less so than in the past.
-
The Rising Incumbent Advantage: What's Gerrymandering Got to Do With It?
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2005Co-Authors: John N. Friedman, Richard HoldenAbstract:The probability that an incumbent in the United States House of Representatives is reelected has risen dramatically over the last half-century. It now stands at more than 98%. A number of authors and commentators claim that this rise is due to an increase in bipartisan Gerrymandering in favor of incumbents. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we find evidence of the opposite effect. All else equal, redistricting has reduced the probability of incumbent reelection over time. The timing of this effect is consistent with the hypothesis that constraints on Gerrymandering, such as the Voting Rights Act, have become tighter over time. Incumbent Gerrymandering may well be a contributor to incumbent reelection rates, but it is less so than in the past.
Eric Mcghee - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Partisan Gerrymandering and Political Science
Annual Review of Political Science, 2020Co-Authors: Eric McgheeAbstract:Recent years have seen a tremendous surge of public interest in partisan Gerrymandering, including robust reform efforts and multiple high-profile court cases. Political scientists have played an i...
-
The Measure of a Metric: The Debate Over Quantifying Partisan Gerrymandering
2017Co-Authors: Nicholas Stephanopoulos, Eric McgheeAbstract:Over the last few years, there has been an unprecedented outpouring of scholarship on partisan Gerrymandering. Much of this work has sought either to introduce new measures of Gerrymandering or to analyze a metric — the efficiency gap — that we previously developed. In this Article, we reframe this debate by presenting a series of criteria that can be used to evaluate Gerrymandering metrics: (1) consistency with the efficiency principle; (2) distinctness from other electoral values; (3) breadth of scope; and (4) correspondence with electoral history. We then apply these criteria to both the efficiency gap and other measures. The efficiency gap complies with the criteria under all circumstances. Other metrics, in contrast, often violate the efficiency principle and cannot be used in certain electoral settings.
-
The Role of Partisan Gerrymandering in U.S. Elections
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2017Co-Authors: Eric McgheeAbstract:The literature on partisan bias in U.S. redistricting has emphasized the role of incidental or accidental causes like incumbency and political geography, while questioning the importance of deliberate Gerrymandering. I reconsider this settled understanding with a wider range of data, a robust difference-in-differences design, and a new measure of bias called the “efficiency gap” that measures the differential wasted votes of a gerrymander directly. I show that the accepted notion of a null effect for Gerrymandering was appropriate for an earlier time period, but that Gerrymandering has played a much larger and more durable role in the last two rounds of redistricting. I conclude that it is no longer certain that Gerrymandering will play a modest role in the future.
Meredith P. Richards - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Gerrymandering educational opportunity
Phi Delta Kappan, 2017Co-Authors: Meredith P. RichardsAbstract:Gerrymandering is known best as a tool to manipulate boundaries for voting districts, but school districts have long used the same tool to manipulate school boundaries. The author used geospatial t...
-
The Gerrymandering of School Attendance Zones and the Segregation of Public Schools A Geospatial Analysis
American Educational Research Journal, 2014Co-Authors: Meredith P. RichardsAbstract:In this study, I employ geospatial techniques to assess the impact of school attendance zone “Gerrymandering” on the racial/ethnic segregation of schools, using a large national sample of 15,290 attendance zones in 663 districts. I estimate the effect of Gerrymandering on school diversity and school district segregation by comparing the racial/ethnic characteristics of existing attendance zones to those of counterfactual zones expected in the absence of Gerrymandering. Results indicate that the Gerrymandering of attendance zones generally exacerbates segregation, although it has a weaker effect on the segregation of Whites from Blacks and Hispanics. Gerrymandering is particularly segregative in districts experiencing rapid racial/ethnic change. However, Gerrymandering is associated with reductions in segregation in a substantial minority of districts, notably those under desegregation orders.