Essay On Majority-Minority Districts

The events in the congress show who minority and majority groups are dividen even inside and outside the congress.

First of all, the New Jersey Plan will make every state equal, despite their size or population. A goal of the New Jersey Plan is to protect state sovereignty, or supreme power. The New Jersey Plan is the way to go because it’ll give all the states an equal amount of representatives and votes. The New Jersey Plan also calls for a separation of powers in the three branches of government. The plan also proposed a one house unicameral legislature. In addition, every state, big or small, would have equal power which would ensure that the large states wouldn’t overrun the smaller states. On the other hand, if the Virginia Plan gets put into action, the large states will gain more power, leaving us smaller states in the dust with very little power in the federal government. The Virginia Plan was created to make the large states more powerful than the smaller states. Do you honestly want to live in a country where you can’t voice your opinion because your country is too small? Generally speaking, the Virginia Plan will make the small states feel like they’re living in the 13 colonies under British rule all over

Forgette Richard, Garner Andrew, and Winkle John. “Do redistricting principles and practices affect US state legislative electoral competition? State Politics and policy quarterly, 20(9) (2009): 151 175.

Riker argues that these bold uses of gerrymandering are made possible, and even encouraged, by two landmark Supreme Court Cases. Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims were two similar cases from the 1960’s that addressed the unequal representation caused by the unwillingness of politicians to adjust the electoral districts to accurately reflect the major population changes of the twentieth century.15 Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims forced Congress and state legislative bodies to correct this inaccurate political representation by mandating equally sized voting districts.16 In fact, Reynolds v. Sims went so far as to require a voting population difference of no more than ten percent between the largest and smallest electoral districts.17 Furthermore,

Politics in the United States is a complex structure that is comprised of many systems. While most of these systems appear to work well, there are a few that are broken. A perfect example of a broken system is the district boundaries and the likelihood of gerrymandering. Multiple states across the country are subjected to gerrymandering, which is the act of dividing a county into election districts that provide one political party with an unfair advantage over the other. Gerrymandering is used to help or prevent a particular demographic from gaining adequate representation. In Florida, for example, there is controversy over Congressional District 5, which extends from Jacksonville down to Orlando in a way that creates a “minority-majority” district.

The article explains the author reasons on why America is “racial democracy” and how much of problem it is. The authors Jason Stanley and Weaver first explain where America has gotten their ideas of liberty “Though the liberty of moderns is more familiar to Americans, it is in fact the liberty of the ancients that provides the fundamental justification for the central political ideals of the American Democratic tradition.” The purpose of the author’s explaining this is to later show how America has turned away from their idea which is liberty and how it now became a “racial democracy”.

Gerrymandering is a form of boundary redistricting, in which the boundaries of an electoral district or constituency are modified for electoral purposes, often producing a contorted or unusual shape. The resulting district is known as a Gerrymander. Gerrymandering is used as a potential way to achieve desired electoral results for a particular party, or may be used to

In politics, racial and ethnic backgrounds tend to outline the outcomes of public policies- especially in minority communities. Minorities in the United States yearly increase due to both legal and illegal immigration (Shaw et al. 332). The trend will continue and by the middle of the 21st century, the minority population, cumulatively, will surpass the so-called White majority in the United States. The definitions of pluralism and two-tiered pluralism differ between the person’s race and ethnic backgrounds. As for the minorities, it may both bring some advantages and as well as disadvantages in public participation and the passing of public policies; however, in current times, two-tiered pluralism is becoming more dominant in politics as the racial divide within the United States continues to worsen.

According to Massey and Denton (1988), residential segregation “is the degree to which two or more groups live separately from one another, in different parts of the urban environment”(282). Now this is a pretty general definition, but it gives basic but good insight as to what residential desegregation is talking about. In this paper, I will mostly be focusing on residential segregation as it relates to the black and white populations in relation to one another, although I will be referencing some other races briefly to create a better understanding of concepts or ideas.

If I were to choose an improvement to make an American political institution better, I would choose to improve the process of redistricting. I would change redistricting in a way that would make it fairer such as getting someone who is not in either major party to draw the lines for new districts after every census instead of someone from the current party in power. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, (NCSL), redistricting is “the process of redrawing state legislative and congressional district boundaries every 10 years following the decennial United Census.”(Redistricting) Basically redistricting is the election of state legislators, Congress members, and many country and municipal offices who are grouped into districts

In 1973 Congress amended the Voting Rights Act and extended protections to members of “languages minorities.” The new language minorities’ classification meant that the act’s protection now extended to voters non-English speaking minorities. These classifications included those who spoke Spanish, Native American languages, Native Alaskan languages, and Asian languages. Some of the changes to the new amendment within the Voting Rights Act prohibited literacy tests as a requirement for voter registration. It also required jurisdictions with large minority language speaking populations to have non-English speaking ballots as well as oral voting instructions that conformed to the language minorities within their districts. Additionally, the new amendments to the Voting Rights Act also protected minorities from voter dilution (the nullification of minority group votes through a

Historically in America, voting has been a relatively discriminatory practice. It has limited and deprived many individuals of many diverse races, ethnicities, and walks of life from casting their votes to select the individual who they feel is most educated, and skilled to represent their interests. Not only has this been proven to be wrong by discriminating minority groups in voting, it also has proved to be a process, which minimizes the largest growing demographics in the country. Furthermore, with millennials growing to become more politically active, minority groups are becoming more politically involved than ever. Taking this into account an important question that is raised by the author William Eskridge in his book “Legislation and Statutory Interpretation” is “Would minorities be better off with more representatives who had to pay attention to their interests because they are a powerful and organized constituency, rather than with a few representatives of minority districts who specialize in protecting only their interests?” (Eskridge,Frickley,& Garrett, 2006, pp.55).

Distributive Justice Robert Nozick From Anarchy, State, and Utopia, 149-182, with omissions. Copyright @ 1974 by Basic Books, Inc. Reprinted by permission of Basic Books, a subsidiary of Perseus Books Group, LLC. The minimal state is the most extensive state that can be justified. Any state more extensive violates people's rights. Yet many persons have put forth reasons purporting to justify a more extensive state. It is impossible within the compass of this book to examine all the reasons that have been put forth. Therefore, I shall focus upon those generally acknowledged to be most weighty and influential, to see precisely wherein they fail. In this chapter we consider the claim that a more extensive state is justified, because necessary

For optimal fairness measures I believe that the Huntington-Hill method displays the most fairness. Giving the example that ai and Pi are the number of seats for state i and its population, respectively. Then I would look at the measurements by the given fairness formula.

be just the people within the state must also be just. A man is just when he