Gooch 1

Newtons first law of motion states that every object will remain at rest or in uniform

motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force or

pressures. This law is not only a figment of scientific devotion but a reflection of how the world

functions and the way forces enact different changes and actional decisions. In a similar vein, the

government has formed itself through the unrelenting forces of historical figures and moments.

Whether it is through the words of people like Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi or

actions of those like the Sons of Liberty and Harriet Tubman, people make the change based

upon their respective perspectives of the history they are taking a part of. Now while it is

expected that government supplies the perfect solution and makeshift patchwork for different

issues, time and time again it has fallen short. Imagine a world where a person's favorite color

determines the president. Their favorite color is a precedence, and most children are inclined to

lean towards colors their parents like or colors that most of the people around them find

appealing. The lack of color depth and understanding leads to a uniformed election due to people

solely voting based on mundane things like the color of a party or the color of someone's skin.

This lack of education and awareness leads to an elected official that may have never won. But

this is America. People could never win off something so simple like color, right? Wrong. Over

the traverse of times elections and entire campaigns have seen themselves to success by using the

color of both their party and skin. Racially polarized voting is a generational phenomenon that

has plagued America since its earliest days. It is multifaceted yet its most identified causes are

race, demographics, and cyclic lifestyles all of which have lasted through the immense traverse

of time. By instituting better educational access, working to aid impoverished demographics, and

redefining what voter polarization by race is society can work to better and heal the norms

instituted by a racially divided past.

 Gooch 2

The identification of racially polarized voting is when the political preferences of a

majority and minority races diverge at a substantial rate. Therefore, the racial majority voters

have voted with so much cohesion that it defeats the minority candidate of choice repeatedly.

Tests of this racial discrepancy have been proposed and even implemented, but these tests cannot

be diagnostically liable. Therefore, it constrains judicial discretion and emphasizes strong racial

assumptions. Note must also be taken of the notion that there is no generally accepted theory of

racial voter dilution. With no established common knowledge, disagreements will also plague the

judicial application of polarization testing. Regardless of the established assumption that bloc

voting among ethnic groups reflects the reliability of elected officials within that group, it is

unreliable, and the level of homogeneity between group preferences emphasizes that

divergence.1 So, what tests have been implemented to identify such a damaging divergence? In

1986 Thornburg vs Gingles was a US Supreme Court case in which North Carolina was

challenged by African American plaintiffs. The states legislature district plan was challenged

because it violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, by eliminating their right to elect the

representative of their choice. They proved this by emphasizing the redistricting plan set forth to

put black voters into districts with the majority of white voters who would vote against and in

turn defeat their preferred candidates. In attempt to silence these plaintiffs Justice William

Brennan’s plurality court opinion, established three criteria necessary to identify a Section 2 vote

dilution claim. They are now known and identified as the Gingles criteria. The criteria are as

follows: Gingles I; The minority group must be large and geographically compact enough to

constitute a majority of a single-member district. Gingles II; The minority group must be

politically cohesive (i.e., do minority voters tend to vote similarly to one another). Gingles III;

1
Crum, Travis. “RECONSTRUCTING RACIALLY POLARIZED VOTING.” Duke law journal
70, no. 2 (2020): 261-.
 Gooch 3

The majority group must be politically cohesive and have consistently voted as a bloc such that

the preferred minority candidate is usually defeated. 2 As identified before the criteria listed

above of such a test has time and time again been proven ineffective, with other outlying factors

encouraging their illegitimacy.

There are three main methods of racially polarized voting analysis. They are homogenous

precincts, Ecological Regression (ER), and Ecological Inference (EI). The homogenous precincts

method is considered the most simple of the three. This is where election results from different

precincts are compared searching for similar results in those with homogenous race or ethnicity.

For instance, if a precinct if 100% African American and votes 75% for Candidate Z, then it is

identified that 75% of African American voters voted for Candidate Z. The second method:

Ecological Regression is done using a bivariate analysis. This means there are two identified

variables such as race or ethnicity of voters and votes for a candidate in each precinct. Analysts

generate a line of best fit for the data which in turn shows the relationship between the

proportion of a district that is the minority race/ethnicity and the percentage of votes for a given

candidate. The final method is Ecological Interference and is similar to the Ecological Resistance

method. The difference in this method is the use of a method of bounds to constrain the results

indicated by voting patterns, by race within a certain range. It also uses a Maximum Likelihood

Estimation to create a bivariate normal distribution of the possible percentage of votes for a

particular candidate by different racial and ethnic groups with varying confidence intervals.

Ecological Interference is considered the most effective method of the three in identifying racial

polarization. An immediate issue is that analysis methodology involved making

2“Racially Polarized Voting.” Redistricting Data Hub, June 1, 2022.

https://redistrictingdatahub.org/data/about-our-data/racially-polarized-voting/.
 Gooch 4

assumptions/drawing conclusions about individuals based on aggregate-level data. This can lead

to an issue known as an ecological fallacy. This is where an assumption is procured based upon

one individual and is then used as a reflection of the whole.3 Another issue and a legal one at that

is correlation and causation. When Thornburg vs Gingles was initially ruled upon the judges

determined that racially polarized voting was an issue of correlation. This identifies that the laws

should be altered because in the original ruling they did not think it mattered why minority voters

and majority voters voted differently from one another, only that they did. 4

Another important identifying factor of racial polarization is the longstanding racial and

educational alignment with political parties. Contemporary politics highlights the extreme degree

of which the Democratic and Republican parties rely of the support of their respective white and

minority voters.5 This established lack of emphasis on unpolarized voting is as stated

immediately reflected in the fact that most black voters support the Democratic party while white

southerners lean and vote for the Republican. This is a known political truism, and entire

campaigns are built upon this principled idea. Awareness of said polarization is also clear

through cable news. Election recaps focus on the intersection of race and geography when

“Racially Polarized Voting.” Redistricting Data Hub, June 1, 2022.

3

https://redistrictingdatahub.org/data/about-our-data/racially-polarized-voting/.
4 “Racially Polarized Voting.” Redistricting Data Hub, June 1, 2022.
https://redistrictingdatahub.org/data/about-our-data/racially-polarized-voting/.

5 Kuriwaki, Shiro, Stephen Ansolabehere, Angelo Dagonel, and Soichiro Yamauchi. “The
Geography of Racially Polarized Voting: Calibrating Surveys at the District Level:
American Political Science Review.” Cambridge Core, June 27, 2023.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-
review/article/geography-of-racially-polarized-voting-calibrating-surveys-at-the-district-
level/6BEF8C3000B763699C27A4F9E8590516.
 Gooch 5

identifying and predicting the results of an election. Therefore, an identification can now be

made of how politicians take extreme advantage of racial polarization. In order to understand this

the relationship between minority and white voters must be clarified. For instance, candidates

preferred by minorities in primary or general elections are significantly less likely to receive

support from white voters. This specifically applies to counties with high minority populations,

in contrast to counties where the minority race level is insubstantial.6 Through a wider lense it

can be seen that the larger the share of a region a minority group occupies, the higher the white

opposition to the minority's preferred political alternatives are. 7 With this relationship identified

a new one must also be explained. That is the relationship of urbanization and segregation. The

minority population has a direct effect on majority white support and indirect effects like

segregation. Both types of effects are moderated by the distinct levels of urbanization in the areas

of observation. Treating segregation and urbanization as two independent operations with

majority white support allows for nonminority preferred alternatives. For elaboration most white

females isolated from education support the Republican presidential candidate. 8 This is an issued

fueled by a lack of education due to it being such a rural area where segregation is also more

easily instituted.

6Weaver, Russell, and Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen. “Racially Polarized Voting in a Southern U.S.
Election: How Urbanization and Residential Segregation Shape Voting Patterns.” The Review of
regional studies 45, no. 1 (2015): 15-.

7Elmendorf, Christopher S., Kevin M. Quinn, and Marisa A. Abrajano. “Racially Polarized
Voting.” The University of Chicago law review 83, no. 2 (2016): 587–692.

8Weaver, Russell, and Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen. “Racially Polarized Voting in a Southern U.S.
Election: How Urbanization and Residential Segregation Shape Voting Patterns.” The Review of
regional studies 45, no. 1 (2015): 15-.
 Gooch 6

Now that the factors and history of racially polarized voting have been identified a solution can

be arguably instituted. It is distressing impression of how finite the racial polarization theory is

by identifying how an introduction of spatial considerations could resolve any argumentative

discourse. By introducing residential racial segregation as a mediation into this concept of

racially polarized voting, a gain in power over the established relationship can be identified. 9

This is in part encourage as a solution by the identification of black voters consistently choosing

Democratic candidates across districts, whereas Hispanic and white voters’ preferences vary

considerably across geography. The districts with the highest racial polarization are the South

and Midwest. These are extremely concentrated.10 This does not mean that minority coalition

districts can always be drawn, but there is considerable potential for such districts throughout the

United States. This approach to representation would more accurately reflect the realities of

racial voting patterns in American politics today. 11 So how is racially polarized voting aided? It

is done by altering the current Gringles conditions to more accurately apply to this time period.

In doing this the Ecological Interference test becomes more effective and geography plus

urbanization become factors included in the identification of polarization. Ultimately redefining

9Elmendorf, Christopher S., Kevin M. Quinn, and Marisa A. Abrajano. “Racially Polarized
Voting.” The University of Chicago law review 83, no. 2 (2016): 587–692.

10
“Racially Polarized Voting.” Redistricting Data Hub, June 1, 2022.
https://redistrictingdatahub.org/data/about-our-data/racially-polarized-voting/.
11 Kuriwaki, Shiro, Stephen Ansolabehere, Angelo Dagonel, and Soichiro Yamauchi. “The
Geography of Racially Polarized Voting: Calibrating Surveys at the District Level:
American Political Science Review.” Cambridge Core, June 27, 2023.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-
review/article/geography-of-racially-polarized-voting-calibrating-surveys-at-the-district-
level/6BEF8C3000B763699C27A4F9E8590516.
 Gooch 7

polarization and its factors is the only plausible method of reaching the appropriate long-term

solution to racially polarized voting.

 Gooch 8

Works Cited

Elmendorf, Christopher S., Kevin M. Quinn, and Marisa A. Abrajano. “Racially Polarized
Voting.” The University of Chicago law review 83, no. 2 (2016): 587–692.

Crum, Travis. “RECONSTRUCTING RACIALLY POLARIZED VOTING.” Duke law journal

70, no. 2 (2020): 261-.

Elmendorf, Christopher S., Kevin M. Quinn, and Marisa A. Abrajano. “Racially Polarized
Voting.” The University of Chicago law review 83, no. 2 (2016): 587–692.

Kuriwaki, Shiro, Stephen Ansolabehere, Angelo Dagonel, and Soichiro Yamauchi. “The
Geography of Racially Polarized Voting: Calibrating Surveys at the District Level:
American Political Science Review.” Cambridge Core, June 27, 2023.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-
review/article/geography-of-racially-polarized-voting-calibrating-surveys-at-the-district-
level/6BEF8C3000B763699C27A4F9E8590516.

“Racially Polarized Voting.” Redistricting Data Hub, June 1, 2022.

https://redistrictingdatahub.org/data/about-our-data/racially-polarized-voting/.

Weaver, Russell, and Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen. “Racially Polarized Voting in a Southern U.S.
Election: How Urbanization and Residential Segregation Shape Voting Patterns.” The Review of
regional studies 45, no. 1 (2015): 15-.
Gooch 9