ISS 225 Exam 3 - ISS 225 Exam 3 Apportionment the assigning...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
ISS 225 Exam 3 Apportionment – the assigning of the number of seats in the house of congress and state legislatures or how many state and legislative districts a state will have. Every ten years a census is taken. After the census a “reapportionment” is conducted: the process of adjusting the number of house seats among the states to reflect population shifts I. Since 1910 the number of seats has been permanently set at 435, hence no new seats can be added thus the existing seats have to be reallocated II. The population of the US has steadily been moving out of the North to warmer climates in the South After a reapportionment, the district lines within a state have to be redrawn. This process is known as redistricting. State legislative houses are in charge of redrawing these lines. There were three problems with congressional districts, two of which have been resolved, but not the third. I. Multimember districts – The same voters elect more than one representative to serve multiple districts (at large elections). This is not fair especially for minorities (smaller numbers) II. Unequal district size – districts with smaller numbers have each individual voter having the same power as districts with more members. III. Gerrymandering – Drawing district lines to favor a particular group or political party A. Racial gerrymandering – Majority-minority districts were drawn. These are districts in which majorities are black/AA and or Latino/Hispanic. Suppose to maximize the number of representatives from these groups. By concentrating minorities into districts, it will make many other areas more Republican, which is what happened in 1994 with a record number of Republicans being elected. B. Political gerrymandering – the district maps were drawn in 2000. However, after the 2002 election, republicans won control of some state legislatives (i.e. Texas, CA, CO). They began to redraw the maps to favor Republicans Court Cases I. Colgrove v. Green (1946) – apportionment was a political issue so this was an issue for congress and the states and not the courts II. Barber v. Carr (1961) – Overturned this decision and ruled that apportionment was an issue that the courts had jurisdiction over. Tennessee rural v. urban had not redistricted since 1900.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
III. Wesberry v. Sander (1964) – ruled that unequal districts (including multi member) districts violated the “one person, one vote” principal stipulated in the constitution. Each district should have approximately the same number of people. Applied to federal congressional seats. IV. Reynolds v. Sims (1964) – Applied the “one person, one vote” rule to the states Negative political advertising – discredit an opposing candidate in the eyes of the voters. Attack ads – attacks character of opposing candidate.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 03/19/2008 for the course ISS 225 taught by Professor Williams during the Fall '07 term at Michigan State University.

Page1 / 7

ISS 225 Exam 3 - ISS 225 Exam 3 Apportionment the assigning...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online