Opinion ID: 770944
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Evidence of white bloc voting

Text: 30 At trial, the parties presented statistical evidence of racial polarization and bloc voting by white voters in 1994 and 1996, the two election years prior to discovery in which the 1992 redistricting plan was in effect. 8 This evidence addressed racial polarization and white bloc voting in the eight districts challenged at trial, including the four districts challenged on appeal (the four districts affected by the Blackfeet-Flathead Plan). We conclude this evidence showed legally significant white bloc voting. 31 The district court relied upon the statistical evidence presented by the State's expert witness, Dr. Zax. Zax analyzed precinct election returns using a standard statistical technique known as bivariate ecological regression analysis (BERA). The BERA analyses compared the votes a candidate received in an election with the racial composition of the electorate, and produced estimates of the voting behavior of American Indian and white voters. The analyses did not determine the voting behavior of individual voters or determine the exact behavior of a group of voters. The BERA analyses performed by Zax were independent for each district; there was no aggregation of data across districts. 32 Zax produced district-specific results for the eight districts challenged at trial (including the four districts challenged on appeal). Zax first determined the number of Indians and whites of voting age in the relevant election precincts. He did so by examining the 1990 census data on racial composition of the population by census block, then overlaying a precinct map on top of the census bloc maps, and apportioning the racial population data accordingly. 9 When the precinct boundaries and census bloc boundaries were not coterminous, Zax assumed the population was distributed uniformly. Once the racial composition of the election precincts was determined, Zax ran the BERA analysis to estimate minority and white voting percentages by candidate and by election contest. 33 Zax's BERA analysis produced district-specific results for 258 election contests in the eight districts challenged at trial (including the 133 contests in the four districts challenged on appeal). These contests included general elections, ballot initiatives and retention elections 10 at the state and federal level. Zax considered an election between two candidates to be an individual race, and voting with respect to a race in a given district was a contest. Thus, a race taking place in all eight districts (e.g., the 1996 presidential election) was considered to be eight contests. 34 Zax also performed supplemental BERA analyses on twelve primary election and fifteen general election contests occurring in the eight districts challenged at trial in which a white candidate opposed an Indian candidate. He did so by performing a new BERA analysis on data compiled by plaintiffs' expert Floyd. Some of these contests were also included in the general elections previously analyzed by Zax. 11 35