White Voters, Black Representatives, and Candidates of Choice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2005.26.0.267-289Abstract
The challenge of minority representation is an important area of public policy that relies heavily on the work of political scientists. Minority voting rights in the United States encompasses not just access to the ballot, but also guarantees that the ballot has meaning in areas with historic discrimination. In this paper we explore the nomination and election of African-American congressional representatives, with an emphasis on the unsuccessful primary re-nomination fight of Cynthia McKinney. Relying on both precinct level racial participation data and also unique, voter-level information on the partisanship of all white primary participants, we ascertain the extent to which the African-American incumbent’s loss to an African-American challenger was a product of strategic voting by white Republicans under Georgia’s open primary law. We also draw conclusions about the implications of such strategic white voting for the election of African-American candidates of choice, and discuss the implications of those conclusions for the interpretation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.References
Anderson, Nick. 2002. Middle East Conflict Playing a Key Role in Congressional Races across the South. Athens Banner-Herald, August 19, p. A1, A8.
Bauer, Monica, and John R. Hibbing. 1989. Which Incumbents Lose in House Elections: A Response to Jacobson's "The Marginals Never Vanished.' American Journal of Political Science 33:262-271. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111262
Bauer, Raymond A., Ithiel de Sola Pool, and Lewis Anthony Dexter. 1964. American Business and Public Policy. New York: Atherton Press.
Bernstein, Robert A. 1991. Ideological Deviation and Support for Reelection: Party Differences in Senate Races. The Western Political Quarterly 44:987-1003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/106591299104400411 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/448804
Bill Shipp's Georgia. 2002. 16(August 26):6.
Black, Earl. 1978. Racial Composition of Congressional Districts and Support for Federal Voting Rights in the South. Social Science Quarterly 59:435-450.
Black, Earl, and Merle Black. 1987. Politics and Society in the South. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bullock, Charles S., III. 1981. Congressional Voting and the Mobilization of a Black Electorate in the South. Journal of Politics 43:662-682. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130631
Bullock, Charles S., III, and Richard E. Dunn. 1999. The Demise of Racial Districting and the Future of Black Representation. Emory Law Review 48:1209-1253.
Bullock, Charles S., III, and Ronald Keith Gaddie. 1993. Changing from Multimember to Single-member Districts: Partisan, Racial, and Gender Consequences. State and Local Government Review 25:155-163.
Canon, David T. 1999. Race, Redistricting, and Representation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cameron, Charles, David Epstein, and Sharyn OíHalloran. 1996. Do Majority-Minority Districts Maximize Substantive Black Representation in Congress? American Political Science Review 90:794-812. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2945843
Clemetson, Lynette. 2002. For Black Politicians, 2 Races Suggest a Rise of New Tactics. New York Times, August 22.
Cook, Rhonda. 2002. Crossover Voting Push on to Oust McKinney. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 9, p. A1, A16.
Darnell, Tim. 2002. Unintended Consequence: Did Majette win Chill Democratic Vote?
Dart, Bob, and Stephen Krupin. 2002. Campaign Donors Named in 9/11 Suit. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 17, p. C1, C5.
Davidson, Joe. 2002. McKinney Loses Race to Majette in Georgia. Focus, September, p. 5.
Davis, Mark. 2002. The Truth about the Republican Crossover in the 4th. Unpublished.
Davis, Mark. 2003. Telephone interview with Charles Bullock, April 7.
Epstein, David, and Sharyn OíHalloran. 1999. Measuring the Electoral and Policy Impact of Majority-Minority Voting Districts. American Journal of Political Science 43: 367-395. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2991799
Epstein, David. 2002. Report of Dr. David Epstein, submitted in Georgia v. Ashcroft.
Eversley, Melanie. 2002. Campaigns Kick It Up a Notch. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 6, p, A5.
Fenno, Richard F., Jr. 1978. Home Style. Boston: Little, Brown.
Gaddie, Ronald Keith, and Lesli E. McCollum. 2000. Estimating the Incumbency Advantage: A New Approach to an Old Problem. American Review of Politics 21:273-297.
Galloway, Jim. 2002. Voters Turn Away Confrontation for Consensus. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 25, p. A1, A13.
Guinier, Lani. 1994. The Tyranny of the Majority. New York: Free Press.
Kingdon, John W. 1967. Politiciansí Beliefs about Voters. American Political Science Review 61:137-145. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1953881
Kingdon, John W. 1973. Congressmen's Voting Decisions. New York: Harper and Row.
Lublin, David. 1997. The Paradox of Representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lublin, David, and D. Stephen Voss. 2003. The Missing Middle: Why Median-Voter Theory Can't Save Democrats from Singing the Boll-Weevil Blues. Journal of Politics 65:227-237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00011
McKinney's Faults, Not Open Primaries, Cost Her the Nomination. 2002. Athens Banner Herald, October 8, p. A8.
Miller, Steve. 2002. GOP Gets Out the Vote for Foe. Washington Times, August 19.
Parker, Frank R. 1990. Black Votes Count. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.5149/9780807869697_parker
Petrocik, John R., and Scott W. Desposato. 1998. The Partisan Consequences of Majority-Minority Redistricting in the South, 1992 and 1994. Journal of Politics 60:613-633. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2647641
Pitkin, Hannah. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California.
Pritchard, Anita. 1992. Changes in Electoral Structure and the Success of Women Candidates: The Case of Florida. Social Science Quarterly 73:60-70.
Rankin, Bill. 2002. Name McKinney Victor, Crossover Voting Suit Asks. Atlanta Journal Constitution, October 5, p. E2.
Secrest, Alan. 2002. Upset in the Making . . . Democratic Primary Poll Results: Georgia's 4th Congressional District. Memo of May 29.
Shenon, Philip. 2002. In Georgia, a Race Too Close to Call. New York Times, August 19.
Smith, Ben. 2002. Majette Treads Carefully. Atlanta Journal Constitution, December 15, p. D1, D5.
Smith, Ben, and David A. Milliron. 2002. Vote Analysis: GOP Not Key in McKinney Loss. Atlanta Journal Constitution, October 15, p. A1, A10.
Swain, Carol M. 1993. Black Faces, Black Interests: The Representation of African Americans in Congress. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Tate, Katherine. 2003. Black Opinion on the Legitimacy of Racial Redistricting in Minority-Majority Districts. American Political Science Review 97: 45-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000510
Torpy, Bill. 2002a. Farrakhan to Stump for McKinney. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 16, p. D4.
Torpy, Bill. 2002b. Majette's Coffers top McKinney's. Atlanta Journal Constitution,August 13, p. C1, C3.
Torpy, Bill, and Rhonda Cook. 2002. McKinney Says Majette Guilty of Racial Profiling. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 15, p. D3.
Torpy, Bill, and Melanie Eversley. 2002. McKinney Recycles Endorsements. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 20, p. B3.
Tucker, Cynthia. 2002a. Denise Majette and the New Face of Politics. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 25, p. Q1.
Tucker, Cynthia. 2002b. Itís Best to Cut Lawmakers on the Fringe. Atlanta Journal Constitution, June 30, p. F8.
Tucker, Cynthia. 2002c. If McKinney Loses, She Can Blame Herself. Atlanta Journal Constitution, August 14, p. A20.
Voss, D. Stephen, and David Lublin. 2001. Black Incumbents, White Districts: An Appraisal of the 1996 Congressional Elections. American Politics Research29:141-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X01029002002
Whitby, Kenny J., and Franklin D. Gilliam, Jr. 1991. A Longitudinal Analysis of Competing Explanations for the Transformation of Southern Congressional Politics. Journal of Politics 53:504-518. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131770
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
