Nevada Redistricting and Perpetuation of the Status Quo

Authors

  • David F. Damore

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2006.27.0.149-168

Abstract

Between 1990 and 2000 the population of Nevada increased by over 66 percent. Much of this growth was fueled by an influx of minorities and further concentrated the state’s population in southern Nevada. These forces altered the state’s political landscape and raised the stakes for the decennial redistricting of Nevada’s assembly and senate seats. Employing a multi-methodological approach, this effort demonstrates how the 2001 Nevada redistricting maintained the pre-existing partisan divisions in the state legislature despite a number of factors that threatened to alter the status quo. At the same time, the analysis reveals that the desire of key redistricters to maintain the partisan status quo compromised the typical byproduct that results from bipartisan gerrymanders, incumbent protection.

References

Basehart, Harry, and John Comer. 1991. Partisan and Incumbent Effects In State Legislative Redistricting. Legislative Studies Quarterly 16:65-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/439967

Bowers, Michael W. 1996. The Sagebrush State. Reno: University of Nevada Press.

Brace, Kimball, Bernard Grofman, and Lisa Handley. 1987. Does Redistricting Aimed to Help Blacks Necessarily Help Republicans? Journal of Politics 49:169-185. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131139

Brams, Steven J. 1975. Game Theory and Politics. New York: Free Press.

Bullock, Charles S., III. 1995. The Impact of Changing Racial Composition of Congressional Districts on Legislators. Roll Call Behavior. American Politics Quarterly 23:141-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1532673X9502300202

Cain, Bruce E. 1985. Assessing the Partisan Effects of Redistricting. American Political Science Review 79:320-333. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1956652

Cameron, Charles, David Epstein, and Sharon O.Halloran. 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

Canon, David T. 1999. Race, Redistricting, and Representation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Cox, Gary W., and Jonathan N. Katz. 1999. The Reapportionment Revolution and Bias in U.S. Congressional Elections. American Journal of Political Science 43:812-841. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2991836

Damore, David F. 2003. Redistricting and the Budget Impasse. Las Vegas Review Journal. July 27.

Desposato, Scott W., and John R. Petrocik. 2003. The Variable Advantage: New Voters, Redistricting, and the Personal Vote. American Journal of Politics 47:18-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00002

Gelman, Andrew and Gary King. 1994. Enhancing Democracy through Legislative Re-districting. American Political Science Review 88:541-559. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2944794

Gopian, J. David, and Darrell M. West. 1984. Trading Security for Seats: Strategic Considerations in the Redistricting Process. The Journal of Politics 46:1080-1096. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131243

Kousser, J. Morgan. 1996. Estimating the Partisan Consequences of Redistricting Plans-Simply. Legislative Studies Quarterly 21:521-541. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/440460

McDonald, Michael P. 2004. A Comparative Analysis of Redistricting Institutions in the United State, 2001-02. State Politics and Policy Quarterly 4:371-395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/153244000400400402

Morrison, Jane Ann. 2001a. Perkins Sees Benefit in Court Fight. Las Vegas Review-Journal. May 30.

Morrison, Jane Ann. 2001b. Redrawing the Lines: Nevada's New Twist. Las Vegas Review-Journal. May 20.

Morrison, Jane Ann. 2001c. Special Session Possible if No Deal on Redistricting. Las Vegas Review-Journal. June 4.

Morrison, Jane Ann. 2001d. Redistricting: Lawmakers Unable to Reach Deal. Las Vegas Review-Journal. June 5.

Morrison, Jane Ann. 2001e. After 20 Hours, Redistricting Deal Stands. Las Vegas Review-Journal. June 15.

Morrow, James D. 1995. Game Theory for Political Scientists. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Nevada Legislative Counsel Bureau. 2001. Reapportionment and Redistricting, Bulletin No. 01-5. Carson City, NV: Legislative Counsel Bureau.

Niemi, Richard G., and Simon Jackman. 1991. Bias and Responsiveness in State Legislative Redistricting. Legislative Studies Quarterly 16:91-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/439977 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/439969

Rush, Mark E. 1993. Does Redistricting Make a Difference? Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Ryan, Cy. 2003. Reapportionment Steals Thunder from .Incumbents.. Las Vegas Sun. June 3.

Squire, Peverill. 1985. Results of Partisan Redistricting in Seven U.S. States during the 1970s. Legislative Studies Quarterly 10:259-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/439727

Downloads

Published

2006-07-01

Issue

Vol. 27: Summer 2006

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.