Make redistricting great again: A comparative study of the decennial congressional redistricting process and partisan bias from 2012-2016

Abstract

This thesis is a comparative study of the congressional redistricting process in 43 states and an analysis of partisan bias in the U.S. House of Representatives elections in 2012, 2014 and 2016. Partisan bias is, generally speaking, bias beneficial to one party in the translation of votes to seats in an election. The analysis is based on secondary analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data. The renowned metrics of the efficiency gap and partisan symmetry are used to measure partisan bias. The study has shown that politicians in a majority of states redraw congressional district lines every ten years contrary to using independent commissions to draw the lines. In 2011, the Republican Party drew voting districts in 17 states and some of these states have among the highest bias measured in all three congressional elections after redistricting. In the literature, there is some disagreement on what is causing this bias; partisan gerrymandering or self-sorting of voters, or both. In 2018, the United States Supreme Court will decide whether partisan gerrymandering is constitutional, and thereby affecting the redistricting process and possibly influencing the ability of voters to choose their leaders.