IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v101y2020i1p37-52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Detecting Florida's Gerrymander: A Lesson in Putting First Things First

Author

Listed:
  • Robin E. Best
  • Jonathan S. Krasno
  • Daniel B. Magleby
  • Michael D. McDonald

Abstract

Objective We show that Florida's post‐2010 congressional districts were an ex ante knowable gerrymander, which, if diagnosed as a factual matter before enactment, would have avoided both the 2012 and 2014 harm and the state's unnecessarily burdensome reliance on a showing of intent. Method We recount the legal focus on intent, apply the McDonald‐Best equal vote weight effects test standard to the Florida facts, and use more than 25,000 simulated districting plans to check on whether there was a gerrymander effect. Results We find a pro‐Republican gerrymander effect could have been detected in advance of enacting Florida's redistricting plan. Conclusion In specific reference to Florida, we conclude the enacted districts could have been identified as a gerrymander beforehand, allowing court proceedings to move expeditiously and with a clear focus. As a general matter, we conclude a comprehensive approach to gerrymandering is best served by following a two‐part prescription: (1) set an effect standard for identifying a gerrymander and (2) know the intent by checking the facts against the standard.

Suggested Citation

  • Robin E. Best & Jonathan S. Krasno & Daniel B. Magleby & Michael D. McDonald, 2020. "Detecting Florida's Gerrymander: A Lesson in Putting First Things First," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(1), pages 37-52, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:1:p:37-52
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12739
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12739
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12739?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:1:p:37-52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.