Search

GIMPEL, JAMES. 1996. National Elections and the Autonomy of American State Party Systems. Pp. xi, 241. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press. $45.00. Paperbound, $19.95. In 1956, the eminent political [...]

This article focuses on the impact of reapportionment on party representation in the state of New York. Reapportionment in New York has had a dramatic impact on party representation. The likelihood of either party, not just one party, winning control of one or both houses has increased enormously. Seat shares now come closer than before to approximate vote shares and although inevitably some bias remains at the crucial level around 50% there is much more equity than before. At the same time, the system is now slightly less responsive than before to shifts in voter sentiment.

This article focuses on the court case, Baker v. Carr, in 1962 in which the United States Supreme Court affirmed that judicial redress could be sought to compel a state to reapportion its legislature. Two years later the Court applied the "one man, one vote" standard to both Congressional districts and state legislative districts, and in 1968 applied the standard to local governments as well. In applying the "one man, one vote" principle during the 1960s, the Court concentrated most of its energies on elucidating the exact degree of population equality which it would require for districts at the various jurisdictional levels.

Writers on comparative political institutions generally have attached considerably greater importance to by-elections held under a parliamentary democracy than to similar elections held in the United States. The reason is that the greater time period which separates general elections in a parliamentary system allows for more by-elections to be held, and that the disciplined legislative majority which a parliamentary type of cabinet usually enjoys leaves the periodic by-election as one of the few occasions when the popularity of government policy may be tested. Defenders of parliamentary government often refer to by-elections when replying to critics of the system who object to rigid party discipline and to the relatively infrequent opportunities given to the electorate to hold the government accountable. Despite this interest in parliamentary by-elections, opinions have differed regarding their accuracy and adequacy as reflectors of public opinion. This study, which is focused on an examination of by-elections held in Canada during the period 1921-1958, is based on the assumption that conflicting conclusions such as these have resulted from an inadequate analysis of available election data and that the significance of by-elections as gauges of political opinion can be assessed more accurately than has heretofore been demonstrated.