|
Redistricting: Studies & Research
Redistricting Reform in California: Proposition 11 on the November 2008 California Ballot
Redistricting Reform in California: Proposition 11 on the November 2008 California Ballot makes five key findings. First, the independent commission is likely to be more ethnically diverse than the legislature’s redistricting committees. Second, the independent commission will be more balanced between Republicans, Democrats and members of neither major party. Third, the independent commission will be more open to public input than legislative committees. Fourth, the districts created by the independent commission will almost certainly be more competitive than districts created by the legislature. Finally, the independent commission will almost certainly produce maps through a process that has improved transparency and public access.
To read the full report, click here.
Building A National Redistricting Reform Movement
"Building a National Redistricting Reform Movement" is the product a two-day redistricting reform conference held in April of 2006. The report presents lessons learned from the failed 2005 redistricting reform efforts in California and Ohio. It also examines strategies, tactics, and tools necessary for the adoption of redistricting reform in several states looking ahead to the prospects for a national reform effort prior to the 2010 census and 2011 redistricting of the House of Representatives.
To read the full report, click here.
The Case for Redistricting Juries: Lessons from British Columbia’s Revolutionary Experiment in Democratic Reform
This working paper, presented on May 4, 2009, argues for an independent redistricting commission, called a “redistricting jury,” that combines Citizens’ Assembly and traditional jury features. Central to the argument is that whereas previously turning average citizens into redistricting experts could not be done reasonably efficiently, new information technologies combined with suitable public policies could radically change this cost/benefit equation.
To read the paper, click here.
The Shape of Representative Democracy
This report from the June 2005 Redistricting Reform Conference held in Airlie, Virginia highlights principles to reform congressional and legislative redistricting. The principles were drafted by a range of groups and individuals and advocated the use of independent commissions to create competitive districts. The report lays out an integrated approach that addresses both procedures for redistricting and standards for redistricting. The conference was organized by the Campaign Legal Center and the Council for Excellence in Government.
To read the full conference report, click here.
Research Shows Ohio's Trends in Redistricting
Oct. 27, 2005. The following report done by the group For The Rest of Us, is an analysis of Ohio's current political boundaries. The report finds that moderates and women are under-represented in Ohio's current political districts, the party favored by district composition won 91% of the time, and the party that controlled the redistricting process historically has gained an average of 8 seats in the Ohio house and 2 in the Ohio Senate over the past 4 decades, even when that party was fairing poorly in national elections.
Click here to read the report.
United States Elections Project: Enhancing Competitiveness in Redistricting
One of the fundamental characteristics of democratic government is that voters have a meaningful choice among candidates on the ballot. The 2002 congressional election sorely tested the degree of democracy in the United States. Pundits widely reported the 2002 congressional elections as the least competitive in modern history. Only 40 - plus or minus a few - out of 435 House races were considered close enough going into election night that the outcome was not known with a high degree of certainty.
How can the country regarded as leader of the free world host legislative elections whose competitiveness is nearly on par with one-political party dictatorships such as Cuba, old Iraq, Libya, and the old Soviet Union? The answer lies in how the districts are drawn. Districts are redrawn every ten years in a process known as redistricting. Only in the United States do the politicians have so much say in how their districts will look. Democracy is turned on its head during redistricting - instead of the voters choosing the representatives, the representatives choose the voters. Naturally, they choose voters that will further their political goals, not enhance democracy.
Click here to read full text.
Incumbency, Redistricting, and the Decline of Competition in U.S. House Elections
Competition in U.S. House elections has been declining for more than 50 years and the 2002 and 2004 House elections were the least competitive of the postwar era. This paper tests three hypotheses that attempt to explain the decline in competition in House elections: the redistricting hypothesis, the partisan polarization hypothesis, and the incumbency hypothesis. We find strong support for both the partisan polarization hypothesis and the incumbency hypothesis but no support for the redistricting hypothesis. Since the 1970s there has been a substantial increase in the number of House districts that are relatively safe for one party and a substantial decrease in the number of marginal districts. However, this shift has not been caused by redistricting but by demographic change and ideological realignment within the electorate. Moreover, even in the remaining marginal districts only a small minority of House races are competitive. The main explanation for the lack of competition even in marginal districts appears to be the inability of challengers to compete financially with incumbents.
Click here to read the full study.
Drawing Lines: A Public Interest Guide to Real Redistricting Reform
On March 28, 2005 the Center for Governmental Studies and Demos released a joint report, Drawing Lines: A Public Interest Guide to Real Redistricting Reform. Drawing Lines recommends criteria for selection of IRC members and suggests key components to be included in any redistricting plan. The report and a newly drafted Addendum analyze the major features of current initiative proposals and pending legislation in light of these recommendations. The analysis finds that while clearly making progress, all have room for improvement to serve the public interest more effectively.
Click here to read Drawing Lines: A Public Interest Guide to Real Redistricting Reform.
Click here to read the Addendum.
Redistricting Reform: What is Desirable? Possible?
Thomas E. Mann, a celebrated political author and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution prepared a study for the Institute of Governmental Studies Conference on "Competition, Partisanship, and Congressional Redistricting," last fall. His study deals with incumbancy protection and the decline of competitiveness in elections; focusing on how redistricting reform might be implemented.
Click here to view the full text.
When Judges Carve Democracies: A Primer on Court-Drawn Redistricting Plans
Associate Professor Nathanial Persily of the University of Pennsylvania Law School recently released a draft essay entitled "When Judges Carve Democracies: A Primer on Court-Drawn Redistricting Plans." Mr. Persily discusses the unique legal constraints on court-drawn plans and assesses the costs and benefits of following various procedures or substantive redistricting principles.
Click here to view When Judges Carve Democracies: A Primer on Court-Drawn Redistricting Plans.
A Citizen's Guide to Redistricting
On July 1, 2008, The Brennan Center for Justice released "A Citizen's Guide to Redistricting." The publication is intended to present the redistricting process for state and federal government, and for many local governments, in digestible parts. There are many moving components, complex issues that we attempt to describe in simple and straightforward fashion, piece by piece. This is a guide for the rules for drawing district lines-a description of how it works today, how it could work in the future, and what it all means. Consider it an owners' manual, for those who should own the process: we, the people.
Click here to view the full text.
Gerrymandering the Vote: How a Dirty Dozen States Suppress as Many as 9 Million Voters
This 2008 study conducted by Mark Dunkelman explores just how dramatically partisan redistricting hampers the ability of voters to affect policy in Washington, D.C.
Click here to view the full text.
Electoral Districting in the U.S.: Can Canada Help?
In his paper, John C. Courtney explores the prospect that the United States could build on the moves of some states that have introduced fundamental changes to the process of redistricting congressional districts. Additionally, this paper examines whether or not it would be possible for the United States to emulate the Canadian model of independent electoral boundary redistricting commissions.
Click here to view the full text.
Everything You Wanted to Know About Redistricting - but Were Afraid to Ask
This American Civil Liberties Union Foundation guide published in 2001 provides answers to many frequently asked questions about redistricting.
Click here to view the full text.
Redistricting Reform
This brief but comprehensive guide to redistricting reform written by Thomas Mann was published in the June 2005 edition of the National Voter, the publication of the League of Women Voters, and provides a great overview of three options for reform.
Click here to view the full text.
2010 Census: Plans for Decennial Census Operations and Technology Have Progressed, But Much Uncertainty Remains: June 11, 2008 Testimony by the Government Accountability Office before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census, and National Archives, House of Representatives
This testimony details progress and problems relating to the 2010 Census, including: (1) the Census Bureau's plans for conducting a paper-based nonresponse follow-up operation; (2) management of the FDCA contract and its latest cost estimates; and (3) the status of the Census Bureau's integrated 2010 project schedule. This testimony is based on past work, recent interviews with Census Bureau officials, and a review of redesign documents.
Click here to view the testimony
2000s Redistricting Case Summaries
Compiled by NCSL in conjunction with other organizations, this page describes cases related to redistricting following the 2000 census, organized by state.
Click here to view the full text.
A Proposal for Reforming Redistricting in the United States: A Model State Constitutional Amendment
Calls for judicial intervention to cure the evils of gerrymandering are legion. But surprisingly little attention has been paid to institutional design: Who should redraw districts, and under what rules? This Paper rejects the notion that redistricting reform should aim to depoliticize the process by denying redistricters access to political data. Instead, states should require redistricting commissions to engage in an iterative process that forces each major political party to compete by presenting a plan with more geographic integrity, more competitive districts, and less partisan bias than the plan last proposed by the other party.
Click here to view the full text.
The United House of Unrepresentatives: What Went Wrong in The Latest Round of Congressional Redistricting
Immediately following the 2002 election, Sam Hirsch published this law journal article assessing the 2001-2002 congressional-redistricting cycle from the perspective of a Democratic redistricting litigator.
Click here to view the full text.
|
