The Influence of Turnout and Constituency Diversity on Voting in Southern State House Races in the 1990s

Authors

  • Joseph A. Aistrup

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2002.23.0.141-166

Abstract

This research focuses on assessing the impact of participation on voting in southern state legislative elections in the 1990s. While turnout is the subject of much study as a dependent variable (Hill and Leighley 1999; Bullock, Gaddie, and Kuzenski 1995; Weber 2000, 233-246; Gaddie and Bullock 1997; Davidson 1994; Hogan 1999), its relationship to southern state legislative outcomes has not been extensively studied. I find that higher levels of turnout lead to increased votes for the Republicans. While this was the case only in South Carolina in the early 1990s, by the late 1990s, this pattern was consistent across five of the ten states under study. These findings suggest that the relationship between participation and voting in state legislative elections in the South may be becoming similar to congressional elections (Campbell 1996). This study also focuses on the influences of constituency diversity on voting outcomes at the state house level. In recent years, most of the discussion regarding the influences of constituency characteristics has been centered around assessing the impact of creating numerous majority-minority districts during the 1990s redistricting (see Lublin and Voss 2000). This study moves beyond this debate to assess the influence of constituency diversity on aggregate voting outcomes, beyond majority-minority districts. Using a measure of constituency diversity (based on the work of William Koetzle (1998)), which measures the “political diversity” of districts, the findings support the contention that constituency diversity has a significant influence in structuring aggregate voting outcomes.

References

Aistrup, Joseph A. 1996. Southern Strategy Revisited. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.

Aistrup, Joseph A., and Ronald Keith Gaddie. 1999. Candidate Emergence in the New Southern Party System. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Savannah.

Barone, Michael, William Lilley III, and Laurence J. DeFranco. 1998. State Legislative Elections: Voting Patterns and Demographics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Black, Merle, and Earl Black. 1987. Politics and Society in the South. Cambridge: Har-vard University Press.

Breaux, David A., and Malcolm E. Jewell. 1992. Winning Big: The Incumbency Advan-tage in State Legislative Races. In Changing Patterns in State Legislative Careers, ed. Gary F. Moncreif and Joel A. Thompson. Ann Arbor: The University of Michi-gan Press.

Bullock, Charles S., III, Ronald Keith Gaddie, and John C. Kuzenski. 1995. The Candi-dacy of David Duke as a Stimulus for Black Voting. In David Duke and the Rebirth of Race in Southern Politics, ed. John C. Kuzenski, Charles S. Bullock, III, and Ronald Keith Gaddie. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Bullock, Charles S., III, and David J. Shafer. 1997. Party Targeting and Electoral Success. Legislative Studies Quarterly 22:573-584. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/440344

Campbell, James E. 1996. Cheap Seats: The Democratic Party?s Advantage in U.S. House Elections. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

Clifton, Brett M. 2000. Hark! The Religious Right Sings: How Conservative Christians have Influenced the Republican Party. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.

Davidson, Chandler. 1994. The Recent Evolution of Voting Rights Law Affecting Racial and Language Minorities. In Quiet Revolution in the South, ed. Chandler Davidson and Bernard Grofman. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Edsall, Thomas B., and Mary D. Edsall. 1992. Chain Reaction. New York: W.W. Norton.

Gaddie, Ronald Keith, and Charles S. Bullock, III. 1997. Voter Turnout and Candidate Participation Effects of Affirmative-Action Districting. In Southern Parties and Elections: Studies in Regional Change, ed. Robert P. Steed, Laurence W. More-land, and Tod A. Baker. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Grofman, Bernard, and Lisa Handley. 1998. Estimating the Impact of Voting-Rights-Related Districting on Democratic Strength in the U.S. House of Representatives. In Race and Redistricting in the 1990s, ed. Bernard Grofman. New York: Agathon Press.

Guth, James L. 1995. South Carolina: The Christian Right Wins One. PS: Political Science and Politics 28:8-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1049096500055967 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/420571

Hill, Kevin. 1995. Does the Creation of Majority Black Districts Aid Republicans: An Analysis of the 1992 Congressional Elections in Eight Southern States. Journal of Politics 57:384-401. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2960312

Hill, Kim Q., and Jan E. Leighley. 1999. Racial Diversity, Voter Turnout, and Mobilizing Institutions in the United States. American Politics Quarterly 27:275-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X99027003001

Hogan, Robert E. 1999. Campaign and Contextual Influences on Voter Participation in State Legislative Elections. American Politics Quarterly 27:403-4 33.

Jacobson, Gary C. 1992. The Politics of Congressional Elections, 3rd ed. New York: HarperCollins.

Kazee, Thomas A. 1998. North Carolina. In The New Politics of the Old South: An Intro-duction to Southern Politics, ed. Charles S. Bullock, III, and Mark Rozell. Balti-more, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Key, V.O., Jr. 1949. Southern Politics in State and Nation. New York: Knopf.

Koetzle, William. 1998. The Impact of Constituency Diversity upon the Competitiveness of U.S. House Elections, 1962-1996. Legislative Research Quarterly 23:561-573. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/440240

Lamis, Alexander P. 1988. The Two Party South. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lublin, David, and D. Stephen Voss. 2000. Racial Redistricting and Realignment. Ameri-can Journal of Political Science 44:792-810. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2669282

Petrocik, John. 1987. Voter Turnout and Electoral Preference: The Anomalous Reagan Elections. Pp. 239-260 in Election in America, ed. Kay Lehman Schlozman. Boston: Allen & Unwin.

Petrocik, John, 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

Sayrs, Lois W. 1989. Pooled Time Series Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412985420

Sullivan, John L. 1973. Political Correlates of Social, Economic, and Religious Diversity in American States. Journal of Politics 35:70-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2129038

Wald, Kenneth D. 1997. Religion and Politics in the United States, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Weber, Ronald E. 2000. Race-Based Districting: Does it Help or Hinder Legislative Representation? Political Geography 19:213-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(99)00037-2

Downloads

Published

2002-07-01

Issue

Vol. 23: Summer 2002

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:

  1. 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.

  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.

  3. 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:

    1. Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;

    2. Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;

    3. 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.

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  1. The Author represents and warrants that:

    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;

    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;

    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;

    4. the Work has not previously been published;

    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and

    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.

  2. 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.