FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W255926884> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W255926884 startingPage "335" @default.
• W255926884 abstract "INTRODUCTION Redistricting is required to ensure equal representation under the law, but the irony is the current process itself is leading to the destruction of a representative government. There is an enormous amount of energy and money that goes into the redistricting process every ten years--and sometimes more frequently--which serves no larger purpose than to give advantage to party over another. Gerrymandering is nearly as old as our republic. The name, of course, comes from Elbridge Gerry, who was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, Governor of Massachusetts, and Vice President. While the names of the political parties have changed over time, the purpose of gerrymandering is still the same: to politically engineer districts to have a better chance of producing a partisan advantage. Fifty years ago a new chapter in redistricting opened, coincidentally, in Shelby County, Tennessee, which was a part of the congressional district we served (Tanner as an eleven-term representative, and Ford and Dinkler as senior aides). In 1962, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its decision in the case of Baker v. Carr. (1) At the time of the suit, the Tennessee General Assembly had failed to redraw legislative maps since the 1901 census. Over that time, the population of Tennessee had grown and shifted. The plaintiff, Charles Baker, who served as an elected official in the Shelby County (Memphis) government, argued that citizens in his county were denied their equal protection rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. In its ruling, the Court found that redistricting was a justiciable issue to which the plaintiffs were entitled to relief. Baker v. Carr and subsequent Supreme Court decisions set the one person, vote standard, which constitutionally required regular redistricting of state legislative and congressional districts. (2) The responsibility for redistricting, however, remained with the elected officials, who were free to collude with or strong-arm their political opponents to draw favorable districts. In 2003, Republicans in Texas used a new-found legislative majority to redraw that state's congressional map, an action that in mid-decade was initiated not by new census numbers but to achieve a purely partisan purpose. The new map resulted in four out of five targeted Democrats losing their seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. (3) Legal challenges to this map were almost entirely unsuccessful, (4) and as a result it now stands that state legislatures have wide latitude to redraw their legislative and congressional maps to achieve a purely partisan objective at any time. (5) I. NEW LEVELS OF POLARIZATION The result of these abuses is an increasingly polarized House of Representatives, where members--well-intentioned public servants as they may be--pledge allegiance to party first. Members of Congress act increasingly like European Members of Parliament, handing over their voting cards to party leadership on all but the most controversial of votes. Advances in technology allow political insiders to surgically slice and dice districts to satisfy the one person, vote requirement, while engineering elections that can be decided in a party primary. In the 111th Congress (2009-2010), when we authors most recently worked together, only 91 of 435 House districts were within a 4-point margin of error of a 50/50 voting pattern. (6) In other words, 344 districts were drawn to so heavily favor party or another that there was little question as to which party would win the general election. With a few exceptions (including Tennessee's 8th District, which is ranked R+8), there was little question as to which party's candidate would win the November election. When general election victory is all but assured, Members of Congress know their only real threat will come in a party primary, and they find themselves paralyzed, unable to work with their colleagues across the aisle. …" @default.
• W255926884 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W255926884 creator A5041912876 @default.
• W255926884 creator A5061052865 @default.
• W255926884 creator A5076859392 @default.
• W255926884 date "2012-06-01" @default.
• W255926884 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W255926884 title "Drawing Voters Back into the Electoral Process: Why and How" @default.
• W255926884 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W255926884 type Work @default.
• W255926884 sameAs 255926884 @default.
• W255926884 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W255926884 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W255926884 hasAuthorship W255926884A5041912876 @default.
• W255926884 hasAuthorship W255926884A5061052865 @default.
• W255926884 hasAuthorship W255926884A5076859392 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C149923435 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C2776154427 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C2778477362 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C2778607876 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C2779910420 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C2780849931 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C555826173 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C83009810 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W255926884 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C144024400 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C149923435 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C17744445 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C199539241 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C2776154427 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C2778272461 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C2778477362 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C2778607876 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C2779910420 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C2780849931 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C2908647359 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C555826173 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C83009810 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C94625758 @default.
• W255926884 hasConceptScore W255926884C97460637 @default.
• W255926884 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W255926884 hasLocation W2559268841 @default.
• W255926884 hasOpenAccess W255926884 @default.
• W255926884 hasPrimaryLocation W2559268841 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W1263124670 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W1513266938 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W1580798013 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W1588909266 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W2125709436 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W2170294427 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W2483971635 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W2518945697 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W252306295 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W2810590745 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W3040796306 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W3124088145 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W3192365314 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W349191283 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W377208648 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W67617732 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W823678149 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W2523678457 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W2597877380 @default.
• W255926884 hasRelatedWork W2601507093 @default.
• W255926884 hasVolume "23" @default.
• W255926884 isParatext "false" @default.
• W255926884 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W255926884 magId "255926884" @default.
• W255926884 workType "article" @default.