After the Census of 2011, how have reapportionment affected the State of Nevada. Does it benefit or hurt the least populated areas/cities/counties versus the larger cities/counties. Please provide facts and details to support your findings.
Nevada is one of the states of the mountain west. A lot of demographic amendments were witnessed by the state in the first decade of 21st century. It was seen in the census that it was one of the highest population gaining states in the country. Due to this reason, it is believed that this region has become a home for a lot of people who are diverse in terms of the demography and geography. With the help of these factors, it has been seen that Nevada has become one of the new swing regions in the country. With the help of this paper, we will try to examine the impact of reapportionment in the Nevada state. Apart from this, we will also try to draw a comparison between the impacts of redistricting on areas with varied number of population. It is believed that the area of Nevada before redistricting was considered as rural area. So the process of reapportionment is considered to have been a boon for the area as the policies were amended in a manner the rural interests were taken care of on the costs of the urban requirements.
Apportionment is the process with the help of which the seats in the House of Representatives in the united nations of America are divided. As per the apportionment of 2010, the total population in the Nevada state was reported to be 2709432 out of which 2700551 were the resident population and 8881 were reported to be overseas. The numbers of representatives in this state as in 2010 were reported to be 4. Nevada was of the 6 six states which gained one seat each as an apportionment that was done on the basis of the census of 2010. The population of the region constantly rose and this was one main reason due to which a gain in the seat was observed in this area. It was also seen that the seats from a lot of states of the U.S. were cut down. New York and Pennsylvania lost two seats each and there were 8 other states as well which lost one seat each as a result of apportionment. (Damore D. F., 2013)
It has been keenly observed that the population of the country is constantly shifting towards the southern and the western parts of the country from the northeast and the Midwest parts. Since Nevada belonged to one of these parts, the population in this state of the country trolled to a higher level and thus an additional seat was given to the state. The nation growth rate of the population in the time period of 2000 to 2010 was seen to be 9.7%. But in the Nevada state this rate was outpaced to 35.1% being the highest in the country. Due to this, the Las Vegas metro area is believed to have the highest population in the area and hence is highly concentrated in the entire region. One important factor that is worth noting here is that a lot of ethical diversity has been seen in the state. The minority population in the Nevada state increased by almost 11 percent in the last decade. Due to this, around 45% of the residents in the Nevada region are believed to be non-whites. These changes proved to be highly important in terms of politics. Due to the electoral factors, the maximum seats in the region belonged to the Democratic Party.
On the basis of the brief overview that has been presented above, it can be seen that the increasing population was one of the main reasons behind the reapportionment and redistricting in the Nevada state. It is believed that the interests of the minorities and urbanization will increase in the region in such a way that the politicians take an advantage of it. It has been seen that population is not one of the most important factors that results in apportionment or redistricting of any states in the U.S. the population in a country migrates from one part to another and therefore leads in changing the political preferences. In many cases, it is believed that the apportionment should be done on the basis of the number of population in that particular area. The most basic formula that is used to carry out the process of the apportionment also works on this factor only. In cases when the number of seats or representatives is less or high in comparison to the population of that area, it is termed as misapportionment or malapportionment. However, in case of the United States, it is a rule that there have to be two seats in each senate irrespective of the population, geography or demography in that region. Also, after each census’s result, the process of apportionment has to take place in the United States of America. Since, the population in the Nevada region increased, with the process of apportionment, one additional seat was given to this region. However, this criterion holds true only for the lower house. The process of apportionment of the upper house is carried out through several other processes. (Crocker, 2011)
The impact of the process of apportionment holds a lot of importance when it is done on the basis of the population distribution in the states. Since the number of people belonging to a particular region or state is more in comparison to any other state, it becomes important that they are paid more attention in the House of Representatives as well as the senate. Obviously the least populated areas of the cities are often at a loss in comparison to the benefits that are enjoyed by the highly populated areas of the city or county. The concept of misapportionment is highly prominent in the country but it does not in any way confer to the benefits attributed by its defenders. It is seen that misapportionment has often lead to different views of people. The minorities often have proved to be the biggest sufferers in the course of this process. The number of minority groups in the country is quite high. However, the representation to these minorities is only given in the smaller states which are considered to be unnecessary. One more argument that is prevalent in this regard is that the senate was formed only to protect the rights of the residents living in smaller state which is not accurate in any case. In comparison to the senate, the house of the representatives is considered to be way more balanced in this regard. (Brown, 2014)
After discussing the benefits that are associated with the apportionment, it is also important that we pay some attention to the costs associated with it. As per the census of 2010, it was seen that around a quarter of the country’s population resides in the states of New York, California and Texas itself. The biggest political disadvantage associated here is that the political candidates face a lot of arduous issues in winning a seat in the constituencies which is larger in size as well as in terms of population. However, this expense stays to a minimum level in smaller states. Apart from campaigning, the process of fund raising too isn’t an easy task for the contenders in bigger states. Due to this, the contenders in the smaller states often win by a larger percentage in comparison to their counter colleagues in larger states. The advantages given to the senators of smaller states often help in augmentation of their influence in comparison to the other senators. (Damore, 2012)
Seeing all the above made arguments, it is seen that there is a strong need of a new convention of the constitution. The abandoning or reducing the powers of the senate can be a good process in this direction. Also, apportionment should be done on the basis of the needs of the people living in a particular area as well. Although population holds an important place in this entire process, it is important that work is done on other areas as well. Judicial intervention is considered to play a very important role in this process thus leading to a fair process of equal state apportionment. It is important to pay attention on the demographic as well as the geographic factors of every state. With the visible trend, we can see that Nevada would surely see a rise in the population in the next census and therefore, it will become important to take a note of the needs of various groups and communities of people living in that area. Another factor that needs to be mentioned here is that the population of the U.S. is increasing at a drastic rate. However, the number of members in the House of Representatives and the senate has not increased with the same pace. This clearly shows that the number of leaders to represent the people of various areas is insufficient. In the states like Nevada, the rate of growth of population in the last decade was almost 35% but the number of seat added to the state was only one which sounds inappropriate. There are a lot of rules mentioned in the constitution regarding the process of apportionment. But the number of amendments made in this regard is quite low. The leaders of the leading parties need to become more lenient in this direction. On the basis of the discussions made above, it can be clearly concluded that there are benefits as well as costs that are associated with the process of apportionment in the United State of America. It is also believed that with the course of time, work will be done in the areas in order to cure the disadvantages that are associated with the process of apportionment in respect to the population of various cities and counties in the states. (Burnett, 2011)