The Implications of Apportionment on Quality Candidate Emergence and Electoral Competition

• DOI: 10.1177/1065912917744896
• Date: 01 June 2018
• Author: Matthew J. Geras
• Published date: 01 June 2018
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912917744896

Political Research Quarterly

2018, Vol. 71(2) 467 –481

© 2017 University of Utah

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1065912917744896

journals.sagepub.com/home/prq

Article

Introduction

In 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two rul-

ings that drastically altered the composition of congres-

sional districts in the United States. In Reynolds v. Sims,

the Court decided that state legislative districts must be

apportioned based upon current populations. Similarly,

in Wesberry v. Sander, the Court declared “one person

one vote,” meaning that congressional districts within

each state need to represent the same number of voters.

As a result of these rulings, congressional districts are

now apportioned to the states based upon a mathematical

formula every ten years. Since this time, vast research

has focused on the electoral implications of gerryman-

dering and redistricting within states, but there has been

less consideration of the electoral implications of con-

gressional apportionment across states. The goal of this

paper is to address the latter and evaluate whether the

current method of apportionment influences levels of

candidate emergence and electoral competition in con-

gressional elections.

There are currently seven at-large congressional dis-

tricts in the United States: Alaska, Delaware, Montana,

North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming.

Moreover, there are an additional eight states that are rep-

resented by either two or three members of the House of

Representatives. Overall, these 15 states have five or

fewer total representatives in Congress, including the

Senate. In comparison, states such as California, Texas,

Florida, and New York individually have more represen-

tatives serving in the federal government than all seven of

the at-large states combined. Ultimately, these small

states only have up to five representatives in federal gov-

ernment, which subsequently means there are only five

opportunities for politically ambitious individuals to

serve in Congress. As less populous states do not neces-

sarily have a fewer number of politically ambitious indi-

viduals, I predict that there is an inverse relationship

between the number of congressional districts in each

state and levels of quality candidate emergence and elec-

toral competition. Specifically, I think congressional

races in states with few congressional districts will attract

a greater number of high-quality candidates and, as a

result, these races will be more competitive than elections

held in states where there are a greater number of political

opportunities. After analyzing congressional elections

from 2002 to 2014, I find support for my hypothesis that

there is a negative relationship between the number of

744896PRQXXX10.1177/1065912917744896Political Research QuarterlyGeras

research-article2017

1University of Oklahoma, Norman, USA

Corresponding Author:

Matthew J. Geras, Carl Albert Congressional Research and Studies

Center, 630 Parrington Oval, Room 101, Norman, OK 73019,

USA.

Email: mgeras@ou.edu

The Implications of Apportionment

on Quality Candidate Emergence

and Electoral Competition

Matthew J. Geras1

Abstract

The U.S. apportions congressional districts both across states and within states based upon population. Scholars have

long focused on the electoral implications of redistricting within states, but there has been less consideration of the

electoral implications of apportionment across states. In this paper, I analyze congressional elections from 2002 to

2014 and theorize that the limited number of political opportunities in states with few congressional districts will lead

to higher levels of quality candidate emergence and electoral competition in these states. I find support for this theory;

specifically, as the number of political opportunities in a state increases, the number of quality candidates running for

office decreases.

Keywords

quality candidates, congressional elections, apportionment, congressional districts