1. 4-1: Bicameralism and Reapportionment

2. Big Idea: Constitutionalism
Enduring Understanding:
The republican ideal in the U.S. is manifested in the structure and operation of the legislative branch.
Learning Objectives:
Explain how the structure, powers, and functions of both houses of Congress affect the policymaking process.
Explain how congressional behavior is influenced by election processes, partisanship, and divided government.

3. Overview Bicameral—two houses Not diverse
House of Representatives
Senate
Not diverse
Lawyers or businessmen
White males prevalent
Most elections leave the House and Senate fairly evenly split (data from 116th Congress)

4. Reasons Historical Experience British System
House of Lords—upper house
House of Commons—lower house
Colonial/state legislatures bicameral
House of Delegates
VA Senate

5. Reasons Great Compromise Virginia Plan—bicameral/population
New Jersey Plan—unicameral/equality
Connecticut Plan—bicameral
House—based on population
Senate—each state receives two

6. Reasons Federalism House—represents people Senate—represents states
Always elected by people
Senate—represents states
Originally appointed by state legislatures
17th Amendment
Power fragmented between large and small states
Protection of minority rights
Slows legislative process
Encourages deliberation and compromise

7. House Size and Apportionment
Constitution
No size limits
Apportioned by population
Every state guaranteed one seat
Size capped at 435
Descriptive representation
Voting Rights Act (1965) to encourage minority representation
Majority minority districts

8. Reapportionment Definition Occurs every 10 years following census
Increases or decreases number of seats held by a state
Also affects Electoral College
Occurs every 10 years following census

9. Districts Each district has one single-member
Equal representation (about 730,000)
Boundary lines drawn by state legislatures
Importance of state majority party

10. Gerrymandering Definition Consequences
Majority party redraws districts to ensure maximum number of seats
Consequences
Protects incumbents
Discourages challengers
Strengthens majority party
Can increase or decrease minority representation

11. Limitations on Redistricting
Supreme Court Decisions
Baker v. Carr (1962)*
districts as equal as possible
Wesberry v. Sanders (1964)
“one person, one vote”
Shaw v. Reno (1993)*
invalidated racially gerrymandered districts
No guarantee of minority representation
Descriptive representation not necessary

12. Limitations on Redistricting
Requirements for Districts
Equally populated
Compact
Contiguous
Cannot dilute minority voting strength
Gerrymandering still allowed for partisan purposes