Table 1: Logit and Zero-truncated Estimates for Models of Black Representation

Similar documents
Does Inequality Reduce Happiness? Evidence from the States of the USA from the 1970s to the 1990s

Quantitative Introduction ro Risk and Uncertainty in Business Module 5: Hypothesis Testing Examples

A (800) (800)

Transport Data Analysis and Modeling Methodologies

Does Manufacturing Matter for Economic Growth in the Era of Globalization? Online Supplement

The Risk Tolerance and Stock Ownership of Business Owning Households

Phd Program in Transportation. Transport Demand Modeling. Session 11

Contents Part I Descriptive Statistics 1 Introduction and Framework Population, Sample, and Observations Variables Quali

Introduction to the Maximum Likelihood Estimation Technique. September 24, 2015

STA 4504/5503 Sample questions for exam True-False questions.

Supporting Online Material for

Chapter 7. Inferences about Population Variances

Intro to GLM Day 2: GLM and Maximum Likelihood

Nonrandom Selection in the HRS Social Security Earnings Sample

hhid marst age1 age2 sex1 sex2

Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Addison-Wesley.

About the Risk Quantification of Technical Systems

Florida CD 10 Survey Results

SUPPLEMENTARY ONLINE APPENDIX FOR: TECHNOLOGY AND COLLECTIVE ACTION: THE EFFECT OF CELL PHONE COVERAGE ON POLITICAL VIOLENCE IN AFRICA

Supporting information for. Mainstream or niche? Vote-seeking incentives and the programmatic strategies of political parties

INVESTORS PERCEPTION TOWARDS MUTUAL FUND: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY WITH REFERENCE TO COIMBATORE CITY

Lecture Note of Bus 41202, Spring 2008: More Volatility Models. Mr. Ruey Tsay

Valuing Environmental Impacts: Practical Guidelines for the Use of Value Transfer in Policy and Project Appraisal

FEMALE PARTICIPATION IN THE LABOUR MARKET AND GOVERNMENT POLICY IN KENYA: IMPLICATIONS FOR

Table 1. The Demand for International Reserves: Benchmark Specification (Constant, Log GNP, Import Share, Export Variability)

Market Variables and Financial Distress. Giovanni Fernandez Stetson University

9. Logit and Probit Models For Dichotomous Data

Optimal Debt and Profitability in the Tradeoff Theory

Table 4. Probit model of union membership. Probit coefficients are presented below. Data from March 2008 Current Population Survey.

The Effects of Shared-opinion Audit Reports on Perceptions of Audit Quality

The University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2010, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Final Exam

Chapter 4 Level of Volatility in the Indian Stock Market

What Makes Family Members Live Apart or Together?: An Empirical Study with Japanese Panel Study of Consumers

Public Issues Survey Wave 6 PAGE 1

Recovery measures of underfunded pension funds: contribution increase, no indexation, or pension cut? Leo de Haan

Policy Analysis Field Examination Questions Spring 2014

DIVIDENDS AND EXPROPRIATION IN HONG KONG

Exercise 1. Data from the Journal of Applied Econometrics Archive. This is an unbalanced panel.n = 27326, Group sizes range from 1 to 7, 7293 groups.

ECO671, Spring 2014, Sample Questions for First Exam

Online Appendix (Not For Publication)

CHAPTER 11 Regression with a Binary Dependent Variable. Kazu Matsuda IBEC PHBU 430 Econometrics

F. ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFFECTING PROJECT EFFICIENCY AND SUSTAINABILITY

How (not) to measure Competition

Home Sweet Home: Home Bias and International. Diversification among Individual Investors

Commercial Lending Distance and Historically Underserved Areas

Ultimate controllers and the probability of filing for bankruptcy in Great Britain. Jannine Poletti Hughes

401(k) PLANS AND RACE

The Family Gap phenomenon: does having children impact on parents labour market outcomes?

Financial Development and Economic Growth at Different Income Levels

Empirical Asset Pricing for Tactical Asset Allocation

ARCH Models and Financial Applications

The following materials are designed to accompany our article Looking for Audience

Public Issues Survey Wave 12

Arkansas Survey Results

2015 Mortgage Lending Trends in New England

West Coast Stata Users Group Meeting, October 25, 2007

U.S. Women s Labor Force Participation Rates, Children and Change:

List of figures. I General information 1

*9-BES2_Logistic Regression - Social Economics & Public Policies Marcelo Neri

The current study builds on previous research to estimate the regional gap in

Threshold cointegration and nonlinear adjustment between stock prices and dividends

Co-Exceedances in Eurozone Sovereign Bond Markets: Was There a Contagion during the Global Financial Crisis and the Eurozone Debt Crisis?

California 24th Congressional District Survey Results

Online Appendix: Revisiting the German Wage Structure

High Default Risk on Down Payment Assistance Program: Adverse Selection Vs. Program Characteristics?

Table IA.1 CEO Pay-Size Elasticity and Increased Labor Demand Panel A: IPOs Scaled by Full Sample Industry Average

Legacy City Revitalization: The Role of Federal Historic Tax Credit Projects

Weekly Options on Stock Pinning

The Effect of Corporate Governance on Quality of Information Disclosure:Evidence from Treasury Stock Announcement in Taiwan

Module 4 Bivariate Regressions

NPTEL Project. Econometric Modelling. Module 16: Qualitative Response Regression Modelling. Lecture 20: Qualitative Response Regression Modelling

Citation 長崎大学東南アジア研究年報. vol.45, p.13-20; 200

Week 2 Quantitative Analysis of Financial Markets Hypothesis Testing and Confidence Intervals

Subject CS1 Actuarial Statistics 1 Core Principles. Syllabus. for the 2019 exams. 1 June 2018

SAVING FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP. An Analysis of Saving across the Foreclosure Crisis. Taylor Billings. April 7, 2018

Appendix B: Methodology and Finding of Statistical and Econometric Analysis of Enterprise Survey and Portfolio Data

Individual and Neighborhood Effects on FHA Mortgage Activity: Evidence from HMDA Data

Lecture Note of Bus 41202, Spring 2017: More Volatility Models. Mr. Ruey Tsay

Using New SAS 9.4 Features for Cumulative Logit Models with Partial Proportional Odds Paul J. Hilliard, Educational Testing Service (ETS)

Panel Regression of Out-of-the-Money S&P 500 Index Put Options Prices

CONVERTIBLE DEBT AND RISK-SHIFTING INCENTIVES. Abstract. I. Introduction

Development, Democracy, and. Corruption - Online Appendix

The Impact of Mutual Recognition Agreements on Foreign Direct Investment and. Export. Yong Joon Jang. Oct. 11, 2010

Race and Housing in Pennsylvania

The impact of news in the dollar/deutschmark. exchange rate: Evidence from the 1990 s

Liquidity and CDS Spreads

Nonprofit organizations are becoming a large and important

Logit Models for Binary Data

Power Spectral Density

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES. THE EFFECT OF SOCIAL SECURITY ON RETIREMENT IN THE EARLY 1970's. Michael D. Hurd. Michael J. Boskin. Working Paper No.

Online appendix to Mark My Words: Information and the Fear of Declaring an Exchange Rate Regime

Minority Small-Firm Credit Applicants: Does Persistence Pay?

Does Competition in Banking explains Systemic Banking Crises?

DETERMINANTS OF AGRO-DEALERS PARTICIPATION IN THE LOAN MARKET IN NIGERIA By Prof. Aderibigbe S. Olomola Senior Economist/Consultant IFPRI-NIGERIA

I L L I N O I S UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN

Disclosure of Financial Statements: A Study on Mobile Telecommunication Companies in Bangladesh

Actuarial Research on the Effectiveness of Collision Avoidance Systems FCW & LDW. A translation from Hebrew to English of a research paper prepared by

EARNINGS MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTING STANDARDS IN EUROPE

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CAPACITY UTILIZATION AND INFLATION: THE CASE OF BAHRAIN

Didacticiel - Études de cas. In this tutorial, we show how to implement a multinomial logistic regression with TANAGRA.

Transcription:

Table 1: Logit and Zero-truncated Estimates for Models of Black Representation School Boards and City Councils with Mixed Systems School Board City Council Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Legislative Size -0.086-0.155-0.047 0.030*** (0.106) (0.106) (0.045) (0.006) % Black VAP 0.073* 0.022 0.051*** 0.019*** (0.036) (0.013) (0.015) (0.003) % Latino VAP 0.028-0.026-0.006 0.004 (0.020) (0.018) (0.013) (0.004) % White BA -0.109 0.037 0.008-0.029*** (0.057) (0.035) (0.028) (0.008) Black-White Segregation 0.018-0.006 0.031* 0.002 (0.018) (0.016) (0.013) (0.004) Past Representation 3.194*** 0.021 3.000*** 0.114*** (0.566) (0.062) (0.358) (0.019) % Black Employment 0.048-0.014-0.097* 0.011 (0.068) (0.041) (0.041) (0.015) Log of Population 1.144** -0.183 0.553* 0.109* (0.422) (0.189) (0.251) (0.048) South 0.267 0.029 1.211** 0.088 (0.512) (0.549) (0.467) (0.079) 1985 0.686 1.017* 0.612-0.010 (1.445) (0.423) (0.454) (0.107) 1990 0.588-0.090 1.174* -0.003 (0.808) (0.345) (0.496) (0.111) 1995 0.935 0.419 1.035* -0.090 (0.751) (0.343) (0.490) (0.114) 2000 0.435 0.292 0.840-0.165 (0.875) (0.392) (0.498) (0.130) Constant -20.692** 4.323-1.632-2.326 (7.520) (3.331) (4.003) (1.274) N 150 66 544 244 χ 2 64.860 97.553 137.569 567.373 AIC 119.977 196.958 355.162 733.418 BIC 162.126 227.613 415.347 782.378 1

Table 2: Logit Estimates for Models of Black Representation Pair-wise Post-matching Subsamples City Councils Subsample 1 Subsample 2 Subsample 3 SMD AL SMD Mixed AL Mixed Legislative Size 0.202*** 0.448** 0.194*** -0.197*** 0.270*** 0.376* (0.057) (0.140) (0.058) (0.055) (0.070) (0.184) % Black VAP 0.166*** 0.146** 0.166*** 0.067* 0.098*** 0.135*** (0.031) (0.045) (0.032) (0.031) (0.017) (0.033) Log of Population 0.365 1.099 0.503 0.396 0.276 0.800 (0.280) (0.739) (0.303) (0.336) (0.224) (0.492) % Latino VAP -0.012-0.038-0.017 0.025-0.016-0.040 (0.018) (0.063) (0.019) (0.025) (0.017) (0.043) % White BA -0.033 0.098-0.040 0.106** 0.022 0.074 (0.025) (0.055) (0.026) (0.040) (0.016) (0.043) % Black Employment -0.014-0.092-0.010-0.130* -0.043-0.111 (0.050) (0.096) (0.051) (0.065) (0.040) (0.127) South 0.279-0.534 0.248 0.878 0.343 0.538 (0.644) (1.245) (0.653) (0.883) (0.513) (0.943) Past Representation 2.328*** 3.981*** 2.370*** 3.032*** 2.996*** 3.089*** (0.408) (0.939) (0.420) (0.525) (0.367) (0.818) Black-White Segregation 0.053** 0.076 0.050* 0.086*** 0.008 0.048 (0.019) (0.044) (0.020) (0.025) (0.014) (0.039) 1985 0.698 1.710 0.584 0.519 0.239 0.998 (0.570) (1.207) (0.584) (0.683) (0.498) (1.031) 1990 1.793** 4.382** 1.735** 1.407* 0.805 1.060 (0.618) (1.459) (0.640) (0.713) (0.511) (1.031) 1995 0.322 1.569 0.198 2.117* -0.180 2.961* (0.640) (1.309) (0.667) (0.870) (0.569) (1.181) 2000 0.272 1.173 0.488 2.551** -0.043 0.832 (0.686) (1.429) (0.726) (0.988) (0.589) (1.183) Constant -10.520* -19.404* -12.115* -0.928-5.207-10.035 (4.332) (9.890) (4.773) (5.640) (3.758) (12.646) N 416 196 395 295 464 214 χ 2 347.971 205.489 339.499 259.401 358.084 215.673 AIC 232.939 92.876 217.652 165.543 279.612 109.014 BIC 289.369 138.770 273.356 217.161 337.571 156.138 2

Table 3: Zero-Truncated Poisson Estimates Models of Black Representation Pair-wise Post-matching Subsamples City Councils Subsample 1 Subsample 2 Subsample 3 SMD AL SMD Mixed AL Mixed Legislative Size 0.026*** 0.038 0.022*** 0.037* 0.108** 0.013 (0.006) (0.037) (0.006) (0.018) (0.033) (0.037) % Black VAP 0.011*** 0.045* 0.010** 0.018*** 0.018*** 0.013 (0.003) (0.018) (0.003) (0.006) (0.005) (0.007) Log of Population -0.004-0.132 0.023-0.009-0.020 0.317* (0.055) (0.197) (0.056) (0.098) (0.071) (0.150) % Latino VAP -0.019*** -0.029-0.019*** 0.003-0.009-0.004 (0.006) (0.025) (0.006) (0.006) (0.011) (0.010) % White BA -0.014-0.006-0.012-0.022-0.028* -0.046* (0.008) (0.018) (0.008) (0.014) (0.014) (0.021) % Black Employment 0.004 0.033 0.008 0.001 0.012 0.034 (0.014) (0.039) (0.014) (0.029) (0.018) (0.041) South 0.104-1.117** 0.064 0.095-0.380 0.179 (0.124) (0.409) (0.129) (0.157) (0.238) (0.209) Past Representation 0.096*** 0.128 0.100*** 0.105* 0.057 0.121 (0.013) (0.149) (0.013) (0.041) (0.053) (0.066) Black-White Segregation 0.002 0.016 0.002 0.016 0.011-0.002 (0.004) (0.016) (0.004) (0.010) (0.006) (0.010) 1985 0.144 0.206 0.151-0.109 0.278 0.184 (0.138) (0.241) (0.138) (0.205) (0.223) (0.282) 1990 0.259 0.151 0.268 0.051 0.298 0.078 (0.134) (0.278) (0.137) (0.204) (0.226) (0.304) 1995 0.289* -0.565 0.346* -0.117-0.069 0.126 (0.137) (0.439) (0.140) (0.214) (0.240) (0.269) 2000 0.151 0.187 0.180-0.057 0.273-0.095 (0.134) (0.367) (0.136) (0.239) (0.220) (0.275) Constant -0.242-3.160-0.794-1.047-2.151-5.978 (1.210) (3.098) (1.247) (2.320) (1.756) (4.132) N 209 59 195 137 130 113 χ 2 459.445 69.616 430.294 153.965 158.130 69.275 AIC 704.629 229.118 661.713 426.241 333.887 258.462 BIC 751.422 258.203 707.535 467.120 374.033 296.645 3

Table 4: Logit Estimates for Models of Black Representation Pair-wise Post-matching Subsamples School Boards Subsample 1 Subsample 2 Subsample 3 SMD AL SMD Mixed AL Mixed Legislative Size 0.141-0.088 0.141-0.653-0.135 0.517 (0.116) (0.224) (0.116) (0.530) (0.085) (0.326) % Black VAP 0.119*** 0.141** 0.119*** 0.203** 0.085*** 0.189 (0.027) (0.054) (0.027) (0.076) (0.013) (0.097) % Latino VAP -0.003 0.025-0.003 0.116* 0.003 0.014 (0.014) (0.028) (0.014) (0.053) (0.011) (0.049) % White BA 0.016-0.096 0.016-0.200-0.026-0.032 (0.034) (0.064) (0.034) (0.133) (0.014) (0.145) Black-White Segregation -0.042** -0.016-0.042** 0.083** 0.001-0.003 (0.015) (0.021) (0.015) (0.030) (0.007) (0.030) Past Representation 1.911*** 4.407*** 1.911*** 2.805** 2.761*** 4.482*** (0.417) (0.717) (0.417) (0.940) (0.251) (1.231) % Black Employment -0.121** -0.098-0.121** -0.040-0.001-0.039 (0.040) (0.059) (0.040) (0.122) (0.017) (0.176) Log of Population 0.606* 0.567 0.606* 1.269 0.512*** 1.070 (0.257) (0.403) (0.257) (0.673) (0.151) (0.791) South 0.401-0.092 0.401-0.379-0.986-4.670 (0.468) (0.968) (0.468) (1.346) (0.706) (2.875) 1985-0.281-0.183-0.281 0.264 0.200 3.672* (0.647) (0.901) (0.647) (1.180) (0.378) (1.736) 1990-0.143-2.289* -0.143 0.218-0.221 1.461 (0.628) (0.999) (0.628) (1.336) (0.373) (1.655) 1995-0.032-0.705-0.032 1.332-0.373 2.236 (0.647) (0.929) (0.647) (1.327) (0.384) (1.529) 2000 0.283-0.595 0.283 0.783 0.211 0.104 (0.611) (0.963) (0.611) (1.431) (0.347) (1.526) Constant 1.167 0.397 1.167-14.884-7.330** -19.083 (3.486) (6.207) (3.486) (12.656) (2.346) (19.950) N 274 176 274 96 735 93 χ 2 202.871 144.190 202.871 80.359 458.358 78.719 AIC 204.915 119.119 204.915 80.948 534.011 74.973 BIC 255.499 163.505 255.499 116.848 598.409 110.430 4

Table 5: Zero-Truncated Poisson Estimates Models of Black Representation Pair-wise Post-matching Subsamples School Boards Subsample 1 Subsample 2 Subsample 3 SMD AL SMD Mixed AL Mixed Legislative Size 0.071-0.017 0.071 0.251 0.072-0.046 (0.039) (0.174) (0.039) (0.266) (0.044) (1.293) % Black VAP 0.016 0.026 0.016 0.053** 0.025*** -0.004 (0.010) (0.021) (0.010) (0.019) (0.004) (0.082) % Latino VAP 0.008-0.041 0.008 0.017-0.002-0.045 (0.006) (0.030) (0.006) (0.036) (0.005) (0.052) % White BA 0.005 0.008 0.005-0.010-0.007* 0.001 (0.011) (0.031) (0.011) (0.060) (0.003) (0.104) Black-White Segregation -0.002-0.004-0.002 0.018-0.002-0.060 (0.005) (0.012) (0.005) (0.024) (0.003) (0.038) Past Representation 0.267*** 0.110 0.267*** -0.048 0.121*** 0.139 (0.061) (0.111) (0.061) (0.110) (0.034) (0.397) % Black Employment -0.002 0.072-0.002 0.057 0.001 0.372* (0.018) (0.059) (0.018) (0.057) (0.011) (0.173) Log of Population 0.066 0.594 0.066-0.709* 0.161* -1.248 (0.091) (0.429) (0.091) (0.329) (0.071) (0.995) South -0.167-0.121-0.167-0.313 0.289 0.250 (0.163) (0.500) (0.163) (1.019) (0.229) (1.997) 1985 0.581 0.758 0.581 0.582 0.177 2.707* (0.312) (0.485) (0.312) (0.561) (0.192) (1.163) 1990 0.246 0.224 0.246-0.098 0.095 3.202* (0.307) (0.494) (0.307) (0.604) (0.205) (1.377) 1995 0.438 0.386 0.438 0.225 0.401* 1.972 (0.297) (0.469) (0.297) (0.575) (0.202) (1.341) 2000 0.492 0.554 0.492 0.769 0.261 1.479 (0.282) (0.554) (0.282) (0.626) (0.212) (1.476) Constant -2.020-14.089-2.020-0.387-3.021* -15.494 (1.878) (7.739) (1.878) (5.084) (1.175) (8.979) N 138 65 138 53 267 37 χ 2 75.247 57.189 75.247 41.462 270.385 25.483 AIC 362.480 173.668 362.480 143.433 653.078 111.622 BIC 403.462 204.109 403.462 171.017 703.300 134.175 5

Table 6: Cross Sectional Models for City Councils (2000) Logit Zero-Truncated Poisson SMD AL SMD AL Legislative Size 0.213-0.010 0.013-0.052 (0.117) (0.117) (0.015) (0.062) % Black VAP 0.219*** 0.106** 0.024* -0.003 (0.059) (0.035) (0.010) (0.007) Log of Population 0.253 1.237 0.084 0.069 (0.359) (0.671) (0.160) (0.083) % Latino CVAP -0.018-0.012-0.003-0.008 (0.029) (0.022) (0.004) (0.011) % White BA 0.031 0.092* 0.020-0.034 (0.113) (0.036) (0.034) (0.019) % Black Employment -0.097-0.209* 0.001-0.038 (0.132) (0.086) (0.029) (0.045) % Black Homeowner 0.074-0.019-0.009 0.007 (0.059) (0.040) (0.017) (0.013) South 0.386 0.623 0.024-0.463 (0.984) (1.737) (0.293) (0.285) Past Representation 2.757* 3.498*** 0.120** 0.187** (1.308) (0.981) (0.037) (0.068) Black-White Segregation -0.000 0.030-0.015 0.008 (0.051) (0.031) (0.013) (0.008) Constant -3.833-1.375-0.400 3.137 (9.750) (5.803) (3.247) (3.592) N 96 88 53 26 χ 2 48.916 34.574 136.222 131.705 AIC 62.008 61.636 200.116 97.080 BIC 90.216 88.887 221.789 110.919 6

Table 7: Cross Sectional Models for School Boards (2000) Logit Zero-Truncated Poisson SMD AL SMD AL Legislative Size 0.375 0.036 0.191** 0.048 (0.397) (0.184) (0.061) (0.043) % Black VAP 0.105 0.169*** 0.048*** 0.021 (0.107) (0.046) (0.010) (0.015) Past Representation 25.290 4.260*** 0.298*** 0.149* - (0.710) (0.043) (0.058) Log of Population -0.329-0.629 0.035 0.193 (1.014) (0.528) (0.142) (0.129) South -20.684*** -0.061-0.483* 0.474** (2.725) (1.069) (0.236) (0.147) % Latino NC 0.015 0.023 0.007 0.006 (0.063) (0.026) (0.007) (0.005) % Black Homeowner -0.009 0.028-0.019-0.003 (0.083) (0.018) (0.018) (0.009) % Black Employment 0.045 0.000 0.063 0.006 (0.240) (0.049) (0.046) (0.021) % White BA 0.129-0.131** -0.032* 0.003 (0.134) (0.040) (0.013) (0.012) % Latino VAP 0.011 0.100** 0.038*** 0.022* (0.036) (0.035) (0.008) (0.010) Black-White Segregation 0.025 0.021-0.007 0.006 (0.055) (0.017) (0.007) (0.005) Constant -9.234 1.042-7.552-4.249 (23.216) (7.379) (4.597) (2.477) N 64 155 37 60 chi2-71.669 289.754 173.730 aic 41.436 108.732 111.443 160.222 bic 65.183 145.253 130.774 185.355 7

Testing for Interaction Effects In order to avoid interacting two continuous variables in the BlackVAP*segregation interaction models, we followed Trounstine and Valdini s (2008) lead and transformed black VAP into a dichotomous dummy variable that equals 1 when black VAP is moderate, 0 otherwise. We then tested our interactions two ways. First, we constructed the dummy variable utilizing the thresholds we empirically estimated: =1 when the black VAP in the council/school district was +/- 1standard deviations from the empirical threshold we estimated. For example, school boards in 2000 using SMDs with a black VAP threshold between 16% and 55% were coded 1, 0 otherwise. Second, we followed Trounstine and Valdini s method (2009, p. 559), which estimated the moderate threshold as between 100/seats/2 and 50%. For example, a school boards in 2000 with 7 seats would be coded as 1 if the black VAP was between 7.1% and 50%. As is illustrated from the examples given, our method takes into account electoral structure, whereas Trounstine and Valdini s method takes into account legislative size.these dummy variables were then interacted with segregation (Tables 9 & 10) to test our hypothesis that school districts and/or councils may in fact need to be hypersegregated in order to concentrate the black population into a single district. Following similar logic, we ran interactions models of legislative size and segregation in Tables 8 and 11, again using the moderate threshold dummy as a measure of black VAP. 8

Table 8: Segregation * Legislative Size: School Boards (2000) Authors Threshold Trounstine and Valdini s Threshold SMD AL SMD AL Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Legislative Size 1.644* -0.188-0.175 0.037 0.137 0.018-0.047 0.062-0.773-0.19-0.175-0.061-0.373-0.198-0.199-0.065 Population (log) -1.002 0.21-0.284 0.028-1.05-0.022-0.216 0.043-0.73-0.178-0.378-0.086-0.957-0.134-0.424-0.089 Black White Segregation 0.029-0.004 0.026 0.011*** 0.038 0.001 0.031 0.011*** -0.026-0.005-0.016-0.003-0.03-0.005-0.017-0.003 Latino VAP 0.036 0.029*** 0.01 0.003 0.014 0.013** 0.004 0.004-0.06-0.006-0.015-0.004-0.034-0.005-0.017-0.003 White BA 0.12 0.053*** 0.014 0.013*** 0.079 0.016 0.022* 0.013*** -0.074-0.015-0.01-0.003-0.044-0.012-0.009-0.003 Black Employment -0.125 0.045 0.076* 0.034-0.119 0.068 0.084* 0.031-0.142-0.041-0.039-0.018-0.157-0.044-0.038-0.018 South -1.288-0.689* -1.705 0.585*** -0.327-0.459-0.991 0.661*** -2.774-0.299-0.998-0.146-2.016-0.342-0.783-0.13 Past Representation 7.330** 0.310*** 4.441*** 0.205*** 6.568*** 0.221*** 4.225*** 0.210*** -2.663-0.049-0.551-0.038-1.684-0.036-0.554-0.032 Moderate Black VAP (MBV) 13.897-0.962-3.18 0.387-8.677-1.486-3.068-0.707 Size*Segregation -1.624 0.308 0.572-0.028-0.96-0.199-0.405-0.087 Moderate Black VAP (MBV) -0.867-1.289 3.005 0.643-4.059-1.556-2.439-0.778 Size*Segregation 0.401 0.162-0.238-0.075-0.519-0.215-0.313-0.098 Constant 3.728-7.161-5.91-4.558** 14.335-5.988-9.054-4.689*** -16.001-3.948-6.033-1.403-19.419-3.771-6.488-1.413 N 68 39 208 83 68 39 208 83 χ 2 43.733 182.876 88.457 158.761 54.594 142.945 82.39 161.879 AIC 46.417 114.347 157.32 233.949 48.52 124.143 153.959 234.361 BIC 70.831 132.647 194.033 260.556 72.935 142.442 190.671 260.968 9

Table 9: Segregation * Black VAP: School Boards (2000) Authors Threshold Trounstine and Valdini s Threshold SMD AL SMD AL Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Legislative Size 1.644* -0.188-0.175 0.037 0.137 0.018-0.047 0.062-0.773-0.19-0.175-0.061-0.373-0.198-0.199-0.065 Population (log) -1.002 0.21-0.284 0.028-1.05-0.022-0.216 0.043-0.73-0.178-0.378-0.086-0.957-0.134-0.424-0.089 Black White Segregation 0.029-0.004 0.026 0.011*** 0.038 0.001 0.031 0.011*** -0.026-0.005-0.016-0.003-0.03-0.005-0.017-0.003 Latino VAP 0.036 0.029*** 0.01 0.003 0.014 0.013** 0.004 0.004-0.06-0.006-0.015-0.004-0.034-0.005-0.017-0.003 White BA 0.12 0.053*** 0.014 0.013*** 0.079 0.016 0.022* 0.013*** -0.074-0.015-0.01-0.003-0.044-0.012-0.009-0.003 Black Employment -0.125 0.045 0.076* 0.034-0.119 0.068 0.084* 0.031-0.142-0.041-0.039-0.018-0.157-0.044-0.038-0.018 South -1.288-0.689* -1.705 0.585*** -0.327-0.459-0.991 0.661*** -2.774-0.299-0.998-0.146-2.016-0.342-0.783-0.13 Past Representation 7.330** 0.310*** 4.441*** 0.205*** 6.568*** 0.221*** 4.225*** 0.210*** -2.663-0.049-0.551-0.038-1.684-0.036-0.554-0.032 Moderate Black VAP (MBV) 13.897-0.962-3.18 0.387-8.677-1.486-3.068-0.707 MBV*Size -1.624 0.308 0.572-0.028-0.96-0.199-0.405-0.087 Moderate Black VAP (MBV) -0.867-1.289 3.005 0.643-4.059-1.556-2.439-0.778 MBV*Size 0.401 0.162-0.238-0.075-0.519-0.215-0.313-0.098 Constant 3.728-7.161-5.91-4.558** 14.335-5.988-9.054-4.689*** -16.001-3.948-6.033-1.403-19.419-3.771-6.488-1.413 N 68 39 208 83 68 39 208 83 χ 2 43.733 182.876 88.457 158.761 54.594 142.945 82.39 161.879 AIC 46.417 114.347 157.32 233.949 48.52 124.143 153.959 234.361 BIC 70.831 132.647 194.033 260.556 72.935 142.442 190.671 260.968 10

Table 10: Segregation * Black VAP: City Councils (2000) Authors Threshold Trounstine and Valdini s Threshold SMD AL SMD AL Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Legislative Size 0.072 0.047** -0.188 0.016 0.078 0.025-0.2 0.026-0.058-0.018-0.173-0.056-0.062-0.019-0.174-0.056 Population (log) 0.149 0.071-0.297 0.034-0.011-0.026-0.224 0.059-0.458-0.175-0.385-0.087-0.41-0.18-0.415-0.101 Black White Segregation 0.019 0.008 0.014 0.009** 0.015 0.099** 0.034 0.013** -0.043-0.006-0.017-0.003-0.044-0.034-0.024-0.004 Latino VAP -0.026-0.017 0.01 0.004-0.029-0.009 0 0.003-0.023-0.011-0.016-0.004-0.023-0.01-0.016-0.004 White BA -0.141-0.043 0.012 0.013*** -0.148-0.022 0.025* 0.013*** -0.092-0.031-0.011-0.003-0.114-0.027-0.01-0.003 Black Employment -0.013-0.006 0.082* 0.037* 0 0.01 0.081* 0.031-0.08-0.035-0.04-0.018-0.086-0.027-0.036-0.018 South 0.92 0.413* -0.83 0.591*** 1.945* 0.413-0.989 0.623*** -0.848-0.209-0.665-0.151-0.8-0.275-0.825-0.128 Past Representation 3.725** 0.075* 4.527*** 0.208*** 3.531** 0.110*** 4.226*** 0.222*** -1.253-0.036-0.553-0.035-1.158-0.032-0.56-0.03 Moderate Black VAP (MBV) -3.897 0.518* -2.350* -0.014-3.632-0.245-1.142-0.311 MBV*Size 1.079* -0.03 0.095** 0.004-0.483-0.017-0.032-0.007 Moderate Black VAP (MBV) 1.378 6.215** 1.466 0.19-3 -2.361-1.327-0.278 MBV*Size -0.004-0.100** -0.005-0.003-0.06-0.036-0.029-0.007 Constant -2.529-0.162-5.64-4.692** -2.12-6.235-7.75-4.727** -8.294-3.34-6.186-1.433-8.531-3.375-6.09-1.559 N 96 53 208 83 96 53 208 83 χ 2 51.777 194.671 89.02 162.261 56.658 403.989 82.423 163.137 AIC 73.819 201.456 153.709 233.79 77.205 198.376 154.435 234.569 BIC 102.027 223.129 190.422 260.397 105.413 220.049 191.148 261.176 11

Table 11: Segregation * Legislative Size: City Councils (2000) Authors Threshold Trounstine and Valdini s Threshold SMD AL SMD AL Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Logit ZTP Legislative Size 0.108 0.021-0.111-0.084 0.078 0.025-0.064-0.068-0.063-0.018-0.135-0.052-0.062-0.019-0.156-0.054 Population (log) 0.267 0.048 0.732 0.107-0.011-0.026 0.76 0.124* -0.512-0.175-0.602-0.069-0.41-0.18-0.726-0.06 Black White Segregation 0.032 0.004 0.018 0.01 0.015 0.099** -0.015 0.003-0.05-0.01-0.032-0.006-0.044-0.034-0.026-0.006 Latino VAP -0.038-0.016 0-0.016-0.029-0.009-0.002-0.006-0.032-0.012-0.051-0.013-0.023-0.01-0.034-0.011 White BA -0.192-0.031 0.025-0.03-0.148-0.022-0.003-0.048-0.099-0.027-0.037-0.021-0.114-0.027-0.051-0.029 Black Employment -0.027 0.028-0.123-0.05 0 0.01-0.1-0.037-0.09-0.031-0.091-0.03-0.086-0.027-0.108-0.039 South 1.225 0.266 1.257-0.769** 1.945* 0.413 0.903-0.59-0.948-0.229-2.267-0.27-0.8-0.275-2.111-0.327 Past Representation 3.941** 0.105** 4.280*** 0.205*** 3.531** 0.110*** 4.689*** 0.188** -1.408-0.035-0.975-0.06-1.158-0.032-1.01-0.066 Moderate Black VAP (MBV) 9.229* 0.324-4.113 2.044*** -3.9-0.879-2.924-0.42 Size*Segregation -0.144* -0.004 0.130* -0.025*** -0.068-0.015-0.064-0.007 Moderate Black VAP (MBV) 1.378 6.215** -4.893* 0.242-3 -2.361-2.495-1.027 Size*Segregation -0.004-0.100** 0.117* 0.003-0.06-0.036-0.046-0.015 Constant -3.013-2.392-0.727 3.736-2.12-6.235-1.932 2.759-9.28-3.54-6.387-2.308-8.531-3.375-6.3-2.854 N 96 53 88 26 96 53 88 26 χ 2 54.017 138.869 42.928 165.215 56.658 403.989 36.135 160.64 AIC 71.703 204.07 69.281 92.232 77.205 198.376 67.458 96.12 BIC 99.911 225.743 96.532 106.071 105.413 220.049 94.708 109.959 12