Does Gerrymandering Cause Polarization
- Submitted by: kjmoon91
- Views: 1100
- Category: Politics
- Date Submitted: 03/10/2010 03:06 PM
- Pages: 3
- Report this Essay
Does Gerrymandering cause polarization, is the question put forth by this article. Undoubtedly gerrymandering is currently a hot topic with the census last year and a very large democratic majority currently sitting in the house and senate. Though many claim that increasing polarization is caused by gerrymandering, is that what it really is? Does gerrymandering in fact hurt America? These topics are exactly what are discussed in great detail and length by McCarthy, Poole and Rosenthal in The American Journal of Political Science.
The three authors discuss how this theory, of how gerrymandering is what’s causing the political polarization of America is “attractive not only because of analytical elegance, but also because it suggests a single, perhaps even feasible, solution to what ails the American polity: take the politics out of redistricting.” They go on however to warn the reader to be skeptical, though the main desire of most elected officials is to remain elected the redistricting may not be the cause of polarization. However they cite Tom Delay’s gerrymander of Texas as a good example of how redistricting can polarize the constituents:
Doing so implies that the supporters of the minority party are packed into as few districts as possible. Ironically, this process leads to more electoral security (and presumably more extreme preferences) for the minority party and less for individual members of the majority party. Consequently, partisan gerrymandering leads to more competitive districts than noncompetitive districts and has an ambiguous effect on polarization.
Polarization could come from other sources as well though, for example “increases in partisan voting, realignment, or just geographic clustering of the likeminded.”
The authors go on to conclude the paper saying even though there is a lack of evidence that gerrymandering is the cause of increased polarization, it certainly aided the republicans in the 108th congress, but it proved to be...
The three authors discuss how this theory, of how gerrymandering is what’s causing the political polarization of America is “attractive not only because of analytical elegance, but also because it suggests a single, perhaps even feasible, solution to what ails the American polity: take the politics out of redistricting.” They go on however to warn the reader to be skeptical, though the main desire of most elected officials is to remain elected the redistricting may not be the cause of polarization. However they cite Tom Delay’s gerrymander of Texas as a good example of how redistricting can polarize the constituents:
Doing so implies that the supporters of the minority party are packed into as few districts as possible. Ironically, this process leads to more electoral security (and presumably more extreme preferences) for the minority party and less for individual members of the majority party. Consequently, partisan gerrymandering leads to more competitive districts than noncompetitive districts and has an ambiguous effect on polarization.
Polarization could come from other sources as well though, for example “increases in partisan voting, realignment, or just geographic clustering of the likeminded.”
The authors go on to conclude the paper saying even though there is a lack of evidence that gerrymandering is the cause of increased polarization, it certainly aided the republicans in the 108th congress, but it proved to be...