Author's Keywords: Keywords: Voting Rights Act, Implementation of Section Five, Department of Justice	Convention All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p66080_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Middlemass, Keesha. "Redistricting and the Justice Department: Voting Rights Policy in Three Southern States" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston Marriott Copley Place, Sheraton Boston & Hynes Convention Center, Boston, Massachusetts, Aug 28, 2002 <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p66080_index.html>

Middlemass, K. M. , 2002-08-28 "Redistricting and the Justice Department: Voting Rights Policy in Three Southern States" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston Marriott Copley Place, Sheraton Boston & Hynes Convention Center, Boston, Massachusetts Online <.PDF>. 2009-05-26 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p66080_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: Redistricting studies as a whole can be characterized as ?who gets what, when and how,? as the redistricting process affects many facets of the political spectrum, from minority participation to representation. The two widely held hypotheses regarding redistricting are that (1) the party in control gains a partisan advantage and (2) redistricting largely serves to protect incumbents (Mayhew, 1971; Ferejohn, 1977; Glazer et al., 1987). Yet these two hypotheses fail to consider the institutions outside of the legislative branch of government. Traditional studies about redistricting tend to investigate electoral results and consequences, but oftentimes ignore the intergovernmental relations between the Justice Department, state/local jurisdictions, and the courts. This study proposes examinations of redistricting should include an analysis of the implementation of the Voting Rights Act as it is related to redistricting, rather than only focusing on the outputs and consequences of majority-minority districts (see Canon, 1999). It is important to understand how the Justice Department uses contiguity, compactness and community of interest in its implementation of Section Five because the Justice Department?s decisions affect the representation of minorities and both political parties.

Modeling Policy Adoption and Implementation in State Government: The Political Economy of Teacher Competency Testing

The Influence of Stare Decisis on the Votes of United States Supreme Court Justices: A Logit Model of Reliance on Partisanship or Precedent