|
Race and Democratic Contestation |
|
|
|
|
Michael S. Kang [View as PDF]
|
|
117 Yale L.J. 734 (2008).
As the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) passes its fortieth anniversary and
faces upcoming constitutional challenges to its recent renewal, a growing number of liberals and
conservatives, once united in support, now share deep reservations about it. This Article argues
that the growing skepticism about the VRA and majority-minority districting is misguided by a
simplistic and impoverished account of electoral competition in American politics. Electoral
competition should be judged with reference to the ultimate ends it is intended to produce—
more democratic debate, greater civic engagement and participation, and richer political
discourse—all of which are generated by a deeper first-order competition among political leaders
that this Article describes as “democratic contestation.” This Article offers democratic
contestation, in place of electoral competition, as a basic value in the law of democracy and as the
foundation for a new theory that helps reconcile approaches to race, representation, and political
competition. A theory of democratic contestation shifts the normative focus from the pluralist
absorption with which groups get what from politics to a new focus on the tenor and quality of
political competition among leaders. When viewed through a theory of democratic contestation,
the VRA is crucially procompetitive in the broader sense of democratic contestation. By carving
out safe majority-minority districts, the VRA may break the discursive stasis of racial
polarization in which politics revolve around the single axis of race. A theory of democratic
contestation reveals how majority-minority districts may energize the process of democratic
contestation and enable an internal discourse of ideas that moves beyond the racially polarized
divide, an otherwise inadvisable move in the face of racially polarized opposition. A theory of
democratic contestation thus demands a reevaluation of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in
LULAC v. Perry and provides a new understanding of the renewed VRA going forward in the
modern world of national partisan competition.
|