Q:

What was the outcome of Baker V. Carr?

A:

Quick Answer

Baker v. Carr was a U.S. Supreme Court case in 1962 in which it was decided that the Tennessee legislation had to reapportion itself based on population. Before that, the last time that Tennessee had redistricted was in 1901.

Know More

Full Answer

This case had a Republican plaintiff, Charles Baker, who asserted that since Tennessee was not redistricting every 10 years as the Tennessee State Constitution mandated, his Shelby County district had approximately 10 times as many residents as some of the more rural districts. Therefore, the votes of rural residents were more valuable than those of urban residents, such as Baker. The Supreme Court agreed that residency should not determine how much value a person's vote has.

Learn more about Elections

Related Questions

  • Q:

    What is the median voter theorem?

    A:

    The median voter theorem, first proposed by Anthony Downs in 1957, holds that in a majority-rule voting system, the population chooses the outcome preferred by the median voter. This means that politicians who stray too far from the political center are likely to be voted out of office.

    Full Answer >
    Filed Under:
  • Q:

    How do you run for president?

    A:

    To run for president in the United States, a prospective candidate must first meet the three Constitutional requirements. The candidate must then form a platform on which to campaign and secure the nomination of his party through the generation of public support that results in voter recognition at caucuses and primary elections.

    Full Answer >
    Filed Under:
  • Q:

    Why are gubernatorial elections important?

    A:

    A gubernatorial election is important because it determines the chief executive officer for the state. The chief executive, by appointing heads of various state agencies and boards and by working with the state legislature, determines the allocation of scarce public resources.

    Full Answer >
    Filed Under:
  • Q:

    What are the pros and cons of compulsory voting?

    A:

    Pros of compulsory voting include a higher turnout, meaning more votes, which in turn gives a better overall impression of what the people want, whereas disadvantages include the fact that minorities may not have as strong of a voice, and money often needs to be spent in order to enforce compulsory voting laws. Australia is one of the best-known examples of a country that uses a compulsory voting system.

    Full Answer >
    Filed Under:

Explore