Conflict over Congressional Reapportionment: The Deadlock of the 1920s

IF 0.4 4区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Nicholas G. Napolio, J. Jenkins
{"title":"Conflict over Congressional Reapportionment: The Deadlock of the 1920s","authors":"Nicholas G. Napolio, J. Jenkins","doi":"10.1017/S0898030622000355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 1929, Congress passed a law capping the US House of Representatives at 435 seats, delegating the power to reapportion to the Executive Branch, and empowering state legislatures to redistrict with few federal limitations. The 1929 law was a compromise after nearly ten years of squabbling over how to apportion pursuant to the 1920 Census. In this article, we consider the apportionment debates of the 1920s both to better understand the politics of the era and to draw lessons that might apply to a potential reapportionment debate today. Throughout the decade, partisanship and political self-interest structured members’ votes on reapportionment. The legislation that eventually passed resulted from a compromise that greatly empowered state legislatures to redistrict freely by removing federal requirements that had been in effect since the 1870s, effectively shifting the battle over congressional representation from one over reapportionment in Congress to one over redistricting in the states.","PeriodicalId":44803,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Policy History","volume":"35 1","pages":"91 - 117"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Policy History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898030622000355","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In 1929, Congress passed a law capping the US House of Representatives at 435 seats, delegating the power to reapportion to the Executive Branch, and empowering state legislatures to redistrict with few federal limitations. The 1929 law was a compromise after nearly ten years of squabbling over how to apportion pursuant to the 1920 Census. In this article, we consider the apportionment debates of the 1920s both to better understand the politics of the era and to draw lessons that might apply to a potential reapportionment debate today. Throughout the decade, partisanship and political self-interest structured members’ votes on reapportionment. The legislation that eventually passed resulted from a compromise that greatly empowered state legislatures to redistrict freely by removing federal requirements that had been in effect since the 1870s, effectively shifting the battle over congressional representation from one over reapportionment in Congress to one over redistricting in the states.
国会重新分配的冲突:20世纪20年代的僵局
1929年,国会通过了一项法律,将美国众议院的席位限制在435个,将重新分配的权力委托给行政部门,并授权州立法机构在没有联邦限制的情况下重新划分选区。在如何根据1920年的人口普查分配之后,经过近十年的争吵,1929年的法律是一项妥协。在本文中,我们考虑20世纪20年代的分配辩论,以便更好地理解那个时代的政治,并吸取可能适用于今天潜在的重新分配辩论的教训。在整个十年中,党派之争和政治上的利己主义决定了议员们对重新分配的投票。最终通过的立法是一项妥协的结果,通过取消自19世纪70年代以来一直生效的联邦要求,极大地授权了州立法机构自由重新划分选区,有效地将国会代表的斗争从国会重新分配的斗争转移到各州重新划分的斗争。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信