Quality & Quantity

, Volume 47, Issue 3, pp 1531–1543 | Cite as

Dynamics of partisan representation the American south, 1898–2010



This study addresses institutional representation in legislative delegations through the decomposition of the southern U.S. House delegation over time. Linear first-order difference equations are calculated to show the shift from the Solid South and the disintegration of Democratic dominance. These calculations also show that the qualitative behavior of partisan control varies over time given a series of critical events, including the Dixiecrat experience, the Congressional reforms of the 1970s, and the Republican Revolution of 1994. However, I also argue that the Republican Revolution was actually predictable, given the twentieth-century experience of the southern delegation.


Difference equations History Political science Legislatures 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abramson P.R., Aldrich J., Rohde D.W., Flanigan W.H.: Change and Continuity in the 2000 Elections. CQ Press, Washington, DC (2002)Google Scholar
  2. Adler E.S.: Constituency characteristics and the “Guardian” model of appropriations subcommittees, 1959–1998. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 44(1), 104–114 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aistrup J.A.: The Southern Strategy Revisited. University of Kentucky Press, Lexington (1996)Google Scholar
  4. Beck P.A.: Partisan dealignment in the postwar south. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 71(2), 477–496 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bibby J.F., Cotter C.P., Gibson J.L., Huckshorn R.J.: Parties in state politics. In: Gray, V., Jacob, H., Vines, K.N. (eds) Politics in the American States, Little, Brown, Boston (1983)Google Scholar
  6. Bickford S.: Reconfiguring pluralism: identity and institutions in the inegalitarian polity. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 43(1), 86–108 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Black E.: A theory of southern factionalism. J. Polit. 45(3), 594–614 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Black E.: The newest southern politics. J. Polit. 60(3), 591–612 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Black E., Black M.: Politics and Society in the South. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1987)Google Scholar
  10. Black E., Black M.: The Vital South: How Presidents are Elected. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1992)Google Scholar
  11. Bowman L., Boynton G.R.: Coalition as party in a one-party southern area: a theoretical and case analysis. Midwest J. Polit. Sci. 8(3), 277–297 (1964)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brady D., Sinclair B.: Building majorities for policy changes in the house of representatives. J. Polit. 46(4), 1033–1060 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brunell T.L., Grofman B.: Explaining divided U.S. senate delegations, 1788–1996: a realignment approach. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 92(2), 391–399 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bullock C.S.: Creeping realignment in the south. In: Swansborough, R.H., Brodsky, D.M. (eds) The South’s New Politics, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC (1988a)Google Scholar
  15. Bullock C.S.: Regional realignment from an officeholding perspective. J. Polit. 50(3), 553–574 (1988b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Campbell B.A.: Change in the southern electorate. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 21(1), 37–64 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Campbell J.E.: The presidential pulse and the 1994 midterm congressional election. J. Polit. 59(3), 830–857 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carmines E.G., Stimson J.A.: Issue Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1989)Google Scholar
  19. Clubb J.M., Flanigan W.H., Zingale N.H.: Partisan Realignment: Historical Patterns of Realignment. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA (1980)Google Scholar
  20. Dawson R.E., Robinson J.A.: Inter-party competition, economic variables, and welfare policies in the American states. J. Polit. 25(2), 265–289 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Duncan P.: Congressional Quarterly’s Politics in America, 1990: The 101st Congress. CQ Press, Washington, DC (1989)Google Scholar
  22. Duncan P.: Congressional Quarterly’s Politics in America, 1992: The 102nd Congress. CQ Press, Washington, DC (1991)Google Scholar
  23. Duncan P.: Congressional Quarterly’s Politics in America, 1994: The 103rd Congress. CQ Press, Washington, DC (1993)Google Scholar
  24. Duncan P., Lawrence C.C.: Congressional Quarterly’s Politics in America, 1996: The 104th Congress. CQ Press, Washington, DC (1995)Google Scholar
  25. Duncan P., Lawrence C.C.: Congressional Quarterly’s Politics in America, 1998: The 105th Congress. CQ Press, Washington, DC (1997)Google Scholar
  26. Duncan P., Nutting B.: Congressional Quarterly’s Politics in America, 2000: The 106th Congress. CQ Press, Washington, DC (1999)Google Scholar
  27. Fearon J.D.: Counterfactuals and hypothesis testing in political science. World Polit. 43(2), 169–195 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fiorina M.P.: Divided government in the American states: a byproduct of legislative professionalism?.   Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 88(2), 304–316 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Frederickson K.: The Dixiecrat Revolt and the End of the Solid South, 1932–1968. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill (2001)Google Scholar
  30. Gilovich T.D., Medvec G.H.: The experience of regret: what, when, and why. Psychol. Rev. 102(2), 379–395 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Goldberg S.: Introduction to Difference Equations: With Illustrative Examples from Economics, Psychology, and Sociology. Wiley, New York (1958)Google Scholar
  32. Hansen J.M.: Individuals, institutions, and public preferences over public finance. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 92(3), 513–531 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Huckfeldt R.R., Kohfeld C.W., Likens T.W.: Dynamic Modeling: An Introduction. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA (1982)Google Scholar
  34. Jackson J.E., King D.C.: Public goods, private interests, and representation. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 83(4), 1143–1164 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jenkins J.A.: Examining the robustness of ideological voting: evidence from the confederate house of representatives. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 44(4), 811–822 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Key V.O.: Southern Politics in State and Nation. Vintage Books, New York (1949)Google Scholar
  37. Key V.O.: American State Politics: An Introduction. Knopf, New York (1956)Google Scholar
  38. Key V.O.: Politics, Parties, and Pressure Groups, Fifth edn. Crowell, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  39. Ladd E.C.: As the realignment turns: a drama in many acts. Public Opin. 7, 2–7 (1985)Google Scholar
  40. Lockard D.: New England State Politics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1959)Google Scholar
  41. Lublin D., Voss D.S.: Racial redistricting and realignment in southern state legislatures. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 44, 792–810 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Martis K.C.: The Historical Atlas of Political Parties in the United States Congress (1789–1989). MacMillan Publishing Company, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  43. Midlarsky M.I.: Political stability of two-party and multiparty systems: probabilistic bases for the comparison of party systems. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 78(4), 929–951 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Miller W.E.: One-party politics and the voter. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 50(3), 707–725 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nutting B., Stern H.A. (ed.): Congressional Quarterly’s Politics in America, 2002: The 107th Congress. CQ Press, Washington, DC (2001)Google Scholar
  46. Parsons M.B.: Quasi-partisan conflict in a one-party legislative system: the Florida senate, 1947–1961. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 56(3), 605–614 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Patterson S.C.: Dimensions of voting behavior in a one-party state legislature. Public Opin. Quart. 26(2), 185–200 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Patterson J.T.: The failure of party realignment in the south, 1937–1939. J. Polit. 27(3), 602–617 (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Patterson S.C., Caldeira G.A.: The etiology of partisan competition. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 78(3), 691–707 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Petrocik J.R.: Realignment: new party coalitions and the nationalization of the south. J. Polit. 49(May), 347–375 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Prothro J.W., Campbell E.Q., Grigg C.M.: Two-party voting in the south: class vs. party identification. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 52(1), 131–139 (1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Riker W.: The Theory of Political Coalitions. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT (1962)Google Scholar
  53. Rohde D.W.: Parties and leaders in the postreform house. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1991)Google Scholar
  54. Schlesinger J.A.: A two-dimensional scheme for classifying the states according to degree of inter-party competition. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 49(4), 1120–1128 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shafer B.E., Johnston R.G.C.: The transformation of southern politics revisited: the house of representatives as a window. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 31, 601–625 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sindler A.P.: Bifactional rivalry as an alternative to two-party competition in Louisiana. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 49(3), 641–662 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sprague J.: One party dominance in legislatures. Legis. Stud. Quart. 6(2), 259–285 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sprague J.: The origin and tortuous process of one party dominance in legislatures. In: Shively, W.P. (eds) The Research Process in Political Science, F.E. Peacock Publishers, Itasca, IL (1984)Google Scholar
  59. Stanley H.W.: Voter Mobilization and the Politics of Race: The South and Universal Suffrage, 1952–1984. Praeger, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  60. Stanley H.W.: Southern partisan changes: dealignment, realignment or both?.   J. Polit. 50(1), 64–88 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stanley H.W., Bianco W.T., Niemi R.G.: Partisanship and group support over time: a multivariate analysis. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 80(3), 969–976 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stonecash J.M., Agathangelou A.M.: Trends in the partisan composition of state legislatures: a response to Fiorina. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 91(1), 148–155 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sundquist J.L.: Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States, 2nd edn. Brookings Institution, Washington, DC (1983)Google Scholar
  64. Tetlock P.E., Belkin A.: Counterfactual thought experiments in world politics: logical, methodological, and psychological perspectives. In: Tetlock, P.E., Belkin, A. (eds) Counterfactual Thought Experiments in World Politics: Logical, Methodologi1cal, and Psychological Perspectives, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1996)Google Scholar
  65. Truman D.B.: The state delegations and the structure of party voting in the United States house of representatives. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 50(4), 1023–1045 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Turner J.: Primary elections as the alternative to party competition in “Safe” districts. J. Polit. 15(2), 197–210 (1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Public Administration and Policy, School of Public & International AffairsUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations