Zoltan Hajnal (America’s
Uneven Democracy, pages 76-78) argues that higher voter turnout is
conducive to ethnic minorities’ representation on city councils. He states that
it is more advantageous for Hispanics and Asian Americans than for African
Americans. The Austin City Council election in November 2014 provides an opportunity
to test whether Hispanics and African Americans benefitted in districts where
those minorities constituted either a substantial percentage of the population
of the district or constituted a majority of the district.
District 1, located in northeast Austin, is considered an
opportunity district for African Americans. Although African Americans do not
constitute a majority of the voting age population, their percentage of the
population is considered large enough to allow an African American candidate an
equal opportunity to win the election in the district. According to the 2010
census, African Americans constituted 29.68 percent of the district’s voting
age population (VAP)—residents who are 18 years of age or older; Hispanics were
37.06 percent of the VAP, and Asian Americans were 3.59 percent of the VAP.
Because Hispanics are more likely than African Americans to be non-citizens,
the district is an African American opportunity district.
Among the nine candidates in District 1, five were Anglos,
and four were African Americans. Table 1 depicts the combined votes for the
five Anglo candidates and for the four African American candidates, by
precinct.
Table 1:
Votes for Anglo Candidates, Votes for African American Candidates, Voter
Turnout in District 1, by Precinct
Precinct
|
Votes for Black Candidates
|
Votes for Anglo Candidates
|
% Vote for Black Candidates
|
% Vote for Anglo Candidates
|
Voter
Turnout
|
101
|
141
|
56
|
71.6%
|
28.4%
|
37.81%
|
102
|
110
|
121
|
47.6%
|
52.4%
|
22.67%
|
103
|
320
|
244
|
56.7%
|
43.3%
|
34.69%
|
104
|
232
|
189
|
55.1%
|
44.9%
|
34.20%
|
108
|
264
|
154
|
63.2%
|
36.8%
|
28.03%
|
117
|
426
|
148
|
74.2%
|
25.8%
|
21.38%
|
118
|
107
|
48
|
69.0%
|
31.0%
|
18.26%
|
121
|
200
|
31
|
86.6%
|
13.4%
|
23.69%
|
122
|
837
|
122
|
87.3%
|
12.7%
|
31.73%
|
124
|
1,191
|
293
|
80.3%
|
19.7%
|
27.68%
|
126
|
1,313
|
340
|
79.4%
|
20.6%
|
31.33%
|
129
|
652
|
142
|
82.1%
|
17.9%
|
26.78%
|
130
|
472
|
198
|
70.4%
|
29.6%
|
32.99%
|
132
|
760
|
177
|
81.1%
|
18.9%
|
33.43%
|
133
|
379
|
142
|
72.7%
|
27.3%
|
32.44%
|
139
|
51
|
30
|
63.0%
|
37.0%
|
19.42%
|
141
|
54
|
37
|
59.3%
|
40.7%
|
19.61%
|
151
|
632
|
284
|
69.0%
|
31.0%
|
36.60%
|
153
|
594
|
388
|
60.5%
|
39.5%
|
27.77%
|
154
|
481
|
238
|
66.9%
|
33.1%
|
30.75%
|
156
|
267
|
97
|
73.4%
|
26.6%
|
34.50%
|
203
|
29
|
24
|
54.7%
|
45.3%
|
24.54%
|
227
|
16
|
14
|
53.3%
|
46.7%
|
13.04%
|
325
|
4
|
8
|
33.3%
|
66.7%
|
23.53%
|
444
|
24
|
9
|
72.7%
|
27.3%
|
12.27%
|
I calculated the relationship between percentage of the vote
for African American candidates and voter turnout for each precinct, which
resulted in a Pearson product moment correlation of 0.25, which is a weak
relationship. The scatterplot of the African American vote and turnout is in
figure 1. The linear trend line reflects the weak, but positive relationship.
Figure 1: Graph of
Relationship between Percentage of the Vote for African American candidates and
Voter Turnout
For candidates, perhaps the campaign’s concentration is on
those precincts that provide a larger percentage of the district’s total vote.
This is reflected in the precinct’s contribution to the total vote in the
district. Table 2 displays the total votes cast in each precinct and the
percentage of the total vote contributed by each precinct.
Table 2: Total Votes
and Percentage Contribution, by Precinct
Precinct
|
Total Votes
|
% Vote
Black Candidates
|
% Contribution
|
101
|
197
|
71.6%
|
1.5%
|
102
|
231
|
47.6%
|
1.8%
|
103
|
564
|
56.7%
|
4.3%
|
104
|
421
|
55.1%
|
3.2%
|
108
|
418
|
63.2%
|
3.2%
|
117
|
574
|
74.2%
|
4.4%
|
118
|
155
|
69.0%
|
1.2%
|
121
|
231
|
86.6%
|
1.8%
|
122
|
959
|
87.3%
|
7.3%
|
124
|
1484
|
80.3%
|
11.3%
|
126
|
1653
|
79.4%
|
12.6%
|
129
|
794
|
82.1%
|
6.1%
|
130
|
670
|
70.4%
|
5.1%
|
132
|
937
|
81.1%
|
7.2%
|
133
|
521
|
72.7%
|
4.0%
|
139
|
81
|
63.0%
|
0.6%
|
141
|
91
|
59.3%
|
0.7%
|
151
|
916
|
69.0%
|
7.0%
|
153
|
982
|
60.5%
|
7.5%
|
154
|
719
|
66.9%
|
5.5%
|
156
|
364
|
73.4%
|
2.8%
|
203
|
53
|
54.7%
|
0.4%
|
227
|
30
|
53.3%
|
0.2%
|
325
|
12
|
33.3%
|
0.1%
|
444
|
33
|
72.7%
|
0.3%
|
13090
|
73.0%
|
100.0%
|
The Pearson product moment correlation of percentage of the
vote for African American candidates in District 1 and the percentage
contribution of the precinct to the total vote is .53, a stronger relationship.
The scatterplot also reflects the stronger relationship.
Figure 2: Graph of
Relationship between a Precinct’s Contribution to the Total District Vote and Percentage
of the Vote for African American Candidates
An analysis of the majority Hispanic districts will be a
future post.
No comments:
Post a Comment