Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-25T00:38:26.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Partisanship, Public Opinion, and Redistricting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2011

Joshua Fougere
Affiliation:
Sidley Austin LLP
Stephen Ansolabehere
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Nathaniel Persily
Affiliation:
Columbia Law School
Guy-Uriel E. Charles
Affiliation:
Duke Law School
Heather K. Gerken
Affiliation:
Yale Law School
Michael S. Kang
Affiliation:
Emory University, Atlanta
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

When the Supreme Court first entered the political thicket with the “one person, one vote” cases of the 1960s, contemporaneous polls showed the Court to be on the right side of public opinion. In 1966, 76 percent of Americans called the Supreme Court decision “rul[ing] all Congressional Districts had to have an equal number of people in them so each person's vote would count equally” “right” (Louis Harris and Associates Poll, The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research). Few, if any, innovations from the Warren Court years met with such deep approval by the public or have had comparable staying power. Indeed, majorities continue to support redistricting based on population equality (see Ansolabehere and Persily 2009).

Beyond the easy-to-grasp concept of “one person, one vote,” however, the public has little knowledge or opinion concerning the redistricting process. Polling on redistricting has been done sporadically and locally. As a consequence, only a few published articles attempt to describe or account for public attitudes concerning the complicated and low salience modern controversies surrounding redistricting on such issues as partisan or incumbent protecting gerrymandering.

This chapter analyzes survey data with the hope of gauging where Americans stand on various controversies surrounding the redistricting process. The first part briefly presents the public opinion surveys utilized and the questions most central to the analysis. The second part begins by examining the extent to which the public is uninformed and lacks opinions about redistricting.

Type
Chapter
Information
Race, Reform, and Regulation of the Electoral Process
Recurring Puzzles in American Democracy
, pp. 227 - 260
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

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

Ansolabehere, Stephen, Fougere, Joshua and Persily, Nathaniel. 2010. bias_resp_better_040507.xls (Data on file with authors).
Ansolabehere, Stephen and Persily, Nathaniel. 2008. Vote Fraud in the Eye of the Beholder: The Role of Public Opinion in the Challenge to Voter Identification Requirements. Harvard Law Review. 121: 1742–4.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen Public Opinion and Election Law Controversies Past and Present. http://volokh.com/2009/11/17/public-opinion-and-election-law-controversies-past-and-present/.
Baker v. Carr. 1962. 369 U.S. 186.
Bowler, Shaun and Donovan, Todd. 2009. Voter Perceptions of Elections and Electoral Competition. (Manuscript prepared for Midwest Political Science Association 2009 Conference, on file with authors).
,Colegrove v. Green. 1946. 328 U.S. 549.
,Cooperative Congressional Election Studies (CCES). 2006. http://web.mit.edu/polisci/portl/cces/commoncontent.html.
,Cooperative Congressional Election Studies (CCES) 2006. MIT_CCES_v4. doc (Data on file with authors).
DiCamillo, Mark and Field, Mervin. 2008a. The Field Poll, Release # 2292. http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2292.pdf.
DiCamillo, Mark 2008b. The Field Poll, Release # 2280. http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2280.pdf.
DiCamillo, Mark. 2005a. The Field Poll, Release # 2168. http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/RLS2168.pdf.
DiCamillo, Mark. 2005b. The Field Poll, Release # 2159. http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/RLS2159.pdf.
DiCamillo, Mark. 2005c. The Field Poll, Release # 2153. http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/RLS2153.pdf.
Issacharoff, Samuel et al. 2007. The Law of Democracy: Legal Structure of the Political Process, 3rd ed. (132–3).
McDonald, Michael P. 2008. Legislative Redistricting. In Democracy in the States: Experiments in Election Reform, ed. Bruce, E. Cain et al., 147. BrookingsInstitution Press.Google Scholar
McDonald, Michael P. 2007. Where the Ivory Tower Meets the Road: Voter Perceptions of Electoral Competition. (Manuscript prepared for “2008 and Beyond: The Future of Election and Ethics Reform in the States” conference, on file with authors).
National Conference of State Legislatures. 2009. Redistricting Law 2010, 178–9. http://www.senate.mn/departments/scr/redist/Red2010/Redistricting_Law_2010.pdf.
Persily, Nathaniel. 2002. In Defense of Foxes Guarding Henhouses: The Case for Judicial Acquiescence to Incumbent-Protecting Gerrymanders. Harvard Law Review 115: 593.Google Scholar
Persily, Nathaniel and Lammie, Kelli. 2004. Perceptions of Corruption and Campaign Finance: When Public Opinion Determines Constitutional Law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 153: 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pew Research Center. 2006. Most Have Heard Little or Nothing About Redistricting Debate: Lack of Competition in Elections Fails to Stir Public (October 27). http://people-press.org/dataarchive/.
,Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. 2006. 26069. Methodology.doc.
,Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, The. http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/data_access/ipoll/ipoll.html.
Rottman, David B. and Strickland, Shauna M. 2006. U.S. Dep't of Justice, State Court Organization 2004, 25–8, 33–9. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/sco04.pdf.
Stephanopoulos, Nicholas. 2007. Reforming Redistricting: Why Popular Initiatives to Establish Redistricting Commissions Succeed or Fail. Journal of Law and Politics 23: 331.Google Scholar
Tolbert, Caroline J., Smith, Daniel A. and Green, John C. 2009. Strategic Voting and Legislative Redistricting Reform: District and Statewide Representational Winners and Losers. Political Research Quarterly 62(1): 92–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×