SHIFTING POWER
Abstract
While prisoners cannot vote, they are counted as residents of the often rural legislative districts where they are incarcerated rather than their home districts. We examine the extent to which incarceration shifts the balance of a representative democracy by considering its impact on legislative apportionment. Drawing on data from the Census, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, and Pennsylvania Redistricting Commission, we develop a counterfactual framework to examine whether removing and returning prisoners to their home districts affects equal representation. Because prisoners are disproportionately African American, we also employ this counterfactual to assess racial differences in the impact of prison gerrymandering. Findings indicate that incarceration shifts political power from urban districts to suburban and rural districts through legislative apportionment. Moreover, non-White communities suffer the most. We conclude by considering how our findings fit a growing literature on the role of mass incarceration in [re]producing racial inequalities in the contemporary United States.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Contact with the criminal legal system has broader consequences for citizenship and participation in the political process.
“has broader consequences for citizenship and participation in the political process (Lerman and Weaver 2014;Remster and Kramer 2018;Sugie 2015;Weaver et al. 2014).”
From The Rise of the Carceral State: Foundations and Contours of a Rapidly Changing Criminal Legal System (2025) · cites this paper as Remster and Kramer 2018
Cites
Mass imprisonment and the life course: Race and class inequality in U.S. incarceration
Pettit, B., & Western, B. (2004) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/000312240406900201 · Cited by 1,499 · see citing works
Incarceration and Stratification
Wakefield, S., & Uggen, C. (2010) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102551 · Cited by 747 · cited 1× · see citing works
“While much research finds that incarceration has far reaching consequences on social and political life (see Wakefield and Uggen, 2010 for a review), we find that unequal political representation is a perhaps more insidious consequence of hyperincarceration that shifts political power away from…”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Rise of the Carceral State: Foundations and Contours of a Rapidly Changing Criminal Legal System
Wakefield, S., & Turney, K. (2025) · RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences · doi:10.7758/rsf.2025.11.3.04 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Remster, B., & Kramer, R.
- Affiliations
- Villanova University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Remster, Brianna
- Venue
- Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2018
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 02
- Pages
- 417-439
- ISSN
- 1742-058X (ISSN-L)
- 1742-0598
- OpenAlex
- W2954967930
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 1.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Du Bois Review Social Science Research on Race (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
- Keywords
- incarceration, legislative apportionment, equal representation, mass incarceration, racial inequality, African American prisoners, counterfactual analysis, redistricting, Pennsylvania
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review