Honors Theses
Date of Award
2002
Document Type
Undergraduate Thesis
Department
Accountancy
First Advisor
John Winkle
Relational Format
Dissertation/Thesis
Abstract
Redistricting is inherently invidious and when coupled with racial considerations, the stakes become much higher. Legislative representation is at the core of the governmental process in the United States. Any changes to this process affect every citizen and their influence in our government and electoral system. This paper approaches this topic from a philosophical standpoint, evaluating the theories and ideas of the Constitution, the Supreme Court, and constitutional scholars. The issue is so complex and divisive that a full understanding of the controlling forces at work is a difficult concept to grasp. In this research the Voting Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause are squared against one another in order to arrive at possible solutions and approaches for this problem. The research focuses primarily on the Constitutional ideas that relate to issues such as redistricting and race. Therefore, the Supreme Court cases themselves, which dealt with these topics during the Civil Rights Era, are a primary source for this paper. Additionally, a diverse group of constitutional theoreticians and legal scholars are cited for the broad range of ideas that they provide in order to evaluate these issues. These articles and cases have provided several interesting insights. Each highlights the sensitivity and importance of racial redistricting and all seem to emphasize the level of contention that such topics spur among various, competing groups. These groups are traditionally tom along racial and political lines. The constitutional scholars adopt two different theories. One tends to stress the importance of majority-minority districts, although it violates the Equal Protection Clause. However, proponents of the “democratic citizenship” theory argue that such districts do not enhance minority voter efficacy, and simultaneously cause others to suffer vote dilution. In accordance with the findings of this research, the conclusion reached provides for greater minority representation and reduced voter dilution. Additionally, this conclusion prevents the extended political and racial polarization propagated by majority-minority districts. Essentially, the findings and theories in this paper lead me to conclude that majority-minority districts serve no one’s interests and are divisive to a unified, color-blind and democratic society.
Recommended Citation
Bailey, Michael Nelson, "Achieving Equality, Balance, and Democracy: Racial Redistricting throughout the Civil Rights Era to the Present" (2002). Honors Theses. 2292.
https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis/2292
Accessibility Status
Searchable text