Criteria specifying fairness for political parties and minority groups within a country focus on the electoral outcome, rather than the process, of redistricting. Electoral systems that rely exclusively on single-member districts, however, cannot guarantee proportional representation or even some minimal percentage of seats for minority political parties or for ethnic, racial or religious minority groups in the population. Special electoral provisions are required if single-member systems are to ensure minority groups some representation. Mixed electoral systems, because they combine single-member districts with seats that are allocated to political parties on the basis of a party list, may not have to institute special provisions to provide minority representation.
Countries that delimit single-member districts usually do not adopt redistricting criteria that refer to fairness in outcome, either because fairness cannot be guaranteed or because seats allocated on the basis of a party list vote are considered sufficient to provide fair outcomes. Instead, countries that delimit districts often rely on redistricting criteria that ensure a fair and impartial process.
Difficulties Ensuring Fairness for Minorities
Drawing boundaries for single-member districts with a view towards achieving proportional representation for political parties or certain minority groups within a country is virtually impossible. Single-member districts inevitably produce disproportionately fewer seats for minority parties and minority groups, unless these groups are geographically concentrated in such a way that line drawers can create a proportionate number of districts in which these groups predominate.
Minority parties and minority voters that are optimally concentrated geographically, and are of sufficient size to control the majority of votes in a requisite number of districts, can hope to achieve representation that is more proportional. This is true of parties such as the Bloc Quebecois in Canada. Most minority parties and minority groups, however, do not achieve this level of proportionality in representation in single-member districts. In fact, without special provisions for minority representation, minority groups can be severely under-represented. (For further discussion of electoral provisions for minority representation in general, not limited to electoral systems that delimit districts, see Minority Provisions.)
A few countries that delimit districts have made provisions to ensure that racial, ethnic or religious minorities are represented in the legislature. The United States and New Zealand are two examples.
Minority Representation in the United States
The United States, because of its sizeable racial and ethnic minority population and its history of discrimination against certain minority groups, has had to address the issue of fairness to minorities in promulgating redistricting plans. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and its amendments in 1982 have established that a redistricting plan that dilutes the voting strength of minority voters by dividing the minority community among different districts may be invalid. Protected minority groups (blacks and Hispanics, for the most part) must meet three conditions to qualify for this protection:
- the group must be sufficiently large and geographically compact to form a majority in a single-member district;
- the group must be politically cohesive (they must share common political interests);
- the group must be able to demonstrate that the majority population votes as a bloc against the minority community's preferred candidates and that the minority-preferred candidates usually lose.
If a minority group is able to satisfy all three of these conditions, a redistricting plan must be fashioned such that minority voters constitute a majority of voters in one or more districts. The minority community must demonstrate that these conditions are satisfied in a court proceeding. In fact, in a series of recent court decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court held that several jurisdictions that created 'majority minority' districts voluntarily--that is, without being required by a court to do so--must redraw these 'majority minority' districts without taking race or ethnicity into account. (For more information about the current status of drawing minority districts in the United States, see US: Ethnic Minorities and Single-Member Districts.)
The Voting Rights Act guarantees racial and ethnic fairness in some minimal sense in the United States. It is minimal because only minority communities that are able to satisfy all three of the conditions are given an opportunity to form the majority of a district and elect a candidate of choice. Blacks and Hispanics are far from proportionally represented in the United States Congress. The minority community in New Zealand is better represented in the legislature because of a more effective provision.
Minority Representation in New Zealand
A unique feature of New Zealand's electoral system is a provision for representation of the descendants of New Zealand's aboriginal Maori population. In addition to sixty general legislative districts, the Representation Commission created five Maori districts in the last redistribution in New Zealand. These Maori districts are geographically defined and overlay the general electoral districts. To vote in a Maori district, rather than a general election district, a Maori voter must register on the Maori roll. Registration on this roll is optional; Maoris can choose to register on the general roll instead. Because of this electoral feature, Maoris in the last election in 1996 were represented in the legislature roughly in proportion to their percentage of the population. (See the case study on New Zealand, Electoral Redistribution in New Zealand, for a more detailed description of this provision.)
Conclusion
Countries that delimit single-member districts cannot guarantee proportional representation to minority political parties or to minority groups within their borders, at least not without special provisions or additional seats elected by a party list vote. Instead, redistricting criteria may be adopted to ensure a fair and impartial redistricting process. Although this will not necessarily produce proportional, or even minimal, representation for minority parties or groups, it does guarantee that any bias is unintentional.
Countries with deep racial, ethnic or religious divisions usually opt for some form of proportional representation rather than rely on single-member districts to elect representatives. Unless the minority group is geographically concentrated or special provisions for minority representation are adopted, the election outcome produced by single-member districts will benefit some groups at the expense of others. In a deeply divided country, this fact may well lead to instability rather than foster strong and stable governments.
