English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We assess the partisan consequences of alternative redistricting plans in 2001 for the Texas House of Representatives. In the paper, we combine a methodological tool (the JudgeIt program) that allows us to examine both enacted and proposed redistricting maps with data from not only the districts used in the 2002 and 2004 Texas House elections, but also from districts that existed only in proposed plans. We find that each redistricting plan benefited their sponsor’s party. In fact, a plan supported and advocated by Democratic Speaker Pete Laney is projected to have kept a Democratic majority in the Texas House after the 2002 elections. Our data also demonstrate that rules matter in redistricting, especially in the context of substantial party system change shown by the growth of the Republican Party in Texas.

Cracking Back: The Effectiveness of Partisan Redistricting in the Texas House of Representatives