9411028 Canon A central problem for representative democracy is to provide a voice for minority interests in a system that is dominated by the votes of the majority. The legitimacy and stability of any democracy depends, in part, on its ability to accomplish that difficult aim. The problem is especially acute in the U.S. Congress where minorities are dramatically underrepresented. State legislatures attempted to address this concern in the 1992 reapportionment process by creating 20 new districts in which a majority of the voters are African-American or Hispanic. The goal of "empowering" minority voters through creative redistricting is extremely controversial. Detractors ridicule the policy as affirmative action for African American politicians and worry about creating political apartheid. The issue received national attention for several weeks in the summer of 1993 as the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision that could challenge the new districts (Shaw v Reno) and Lani Guinier's nomination to the Civil Rights Commission was removed by President Clinton under pressure from Democrats who bridled at her notion of "authentic black representation." Minority districting also has important implications for the normative debate raging in the minority politics and women's studies literature concerning the "politics of difference" versus the "politics of commonality." A politics of commonality strives to provide equal protection of the laws without special treatment for any single group, while a politics of difference calls for proper remedies for previous discrimination and exclusion. Most political observers, including proponents and opponents of the strategy, see the creation of minority-majority districts as an embodiment of the politics of difference. This research challenges that common wisdom. The investigator's previous research shows that many of the African American politicians who were elected in the new districts embody the politics of c ommonality, rather than the politics of difference. This investigation will determine whether behavior in campaigns translates into behavior in office. Does the racially charged atmosphere of some campaigns carry over into the governing process so that some blacks do not represent white voters? Are promises to represent both white and black constituents kept by black members who were elected by biracial coalitions, or do they follow their colleagues in the Black Caucus on some issues that are racially polarizing? This research will examine roll call votes, speeches, introduction of bills, committee assignments, constituency service, and the media's coverage of black House members to explore the nature of representation in black districts. The multivariate analysis to be employed will be supplemented by interviews of members and their staff. The research will provide important new insights about the nature of representation provided to these new districts, the linkages between campaigning and governing in racial politics, and the usefulness of racial redistricting as a means of empowering minority voters.
