Review by Choice Review
Seabrook argues that, contrary to conventional wisdom, constraints on redistricting prevent parties from putting a thumb on the electoral scale for an extended period of time. The constraint of political demands, which recognizes the inherent conflict between the interests of party leaders in securing legislative majorities and the interests of incumbents in retaining their offices, is among the most convincing explanations in the analysis. Further, the difficulties of predicting future population shifts and political tides imperil the ability of efficient gerrymanders to produce long-term electoral returns for parties. It is argued that these facts promote caution among parties when redrawing district lines, and prevent many of the gravest potential ills of gerrymandering. While Seabrook convincingly demonstrates that much of the conventional wisdom surrounding partisan gerrymandering revolves around unrepresentative examples and elections that occur immediately following redistricting, his analysis is limited to two congressional redistricting cycles. With this in mind, the participants in the ongoing political and legal debate over redistricting will be well served to take the findings of this volume seriously as they consider if any reforms are warranted, as redistricting continues in this polarized era. Summing Up: Recommended. Graduate students through professionals. --Timothy Lynch, Lewis-Clark State College
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Choice Review
