Suchergebnisse

Political science has a long tradition of research into topics such
as campaign finance and redistricting, but these separate efforts
have only recently merged into something resembling a recognizable
sub-field of political reform. One impetus for this new-found
coherence has been the emergence of recent reform concerns regarding
such matters as U.S. election administration, primary election
procedures, conflict of interest situations, ballot restrictions on
minor party candidates, and the need for transparency. The addition
of the new on top of the still-unresolved, ongoing problems has
yielded plenty of grist for the political science mill.

Factors which influence the relative attractiveness of American political parties to immigrants and those born in the US; focuses on California.

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.