Sandbox: Difference between revisions
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
Observing that political party and geography both matter, the ''Guardian'''s third table accounts for both | Observing that political party and geography both matter, the ''Guardian'''s third table accounts for both: | ||
:{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; width:500px" | :{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; width:500px" | ||
|+ 1964 Civil Rights Act Senate Version Ayes | |+ 1964 Civil Rights Act Senate Version Ayes | ||
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
This gives an example of Simpson's Paradox. In both the north and the south, the bill had stronger support among Democrats than Republicans. However, aggregating over region leads to the first table, which gives the reverse impression that Republicans supported the bill more strongly. The explanation is that the Democrats were concentrated in the south | |||
Revision as of 14:32, 6 September 2013
Civil rights and Simpson's paradox
Mary Parker sent this link to the Isolated Statisticians list:
Were Republicans really the party of civil rights in the 1960s?
by Harry J. Enten, Guardian, 28 August 2013
The 50th anniversary of the March on Washington and Martin Luther King's famous "I have a dream speech" have been commemorated in much recent news coverage. In light of some Republican claims that their record on civil rights compares favorably to Democrats, the Guardian takes a statistical look at the voting record on the landmark Civil RIghts Act of 1964.
They present 3 tables, which are reproduced below. The first breaks out the vote by party in the House of Representatives and the Senate, indicating that the bill had greater support among Republicans.
1964 Civil Rights Act Senate Version Ayes Democrats Republicans House 153 of 244 (63%) 136 of 171 (80%) Senate 46 of 67 (69%) 27 of 33 (82%)
The second table takes into account the history of the Civil War, separating out the 11 southern states that formed the Confederacy (note the remaining 39 states are classified as "Union", but of course not all of these current states existed in the 1860s).
1964 Civil Rights Act Senate Version Ayes Union Confederacy House 281 of 313 (90%) 8 of 102 (8%) Senate 72 of 78 (92%) 1 of 22 (5%)
Observing that political party and geography both matter, the Guardian's third table accounts for both:
1964 Civil Rights Act Senate Version Ayes Dem/Union Rep/Union Dem/Confed Rep/Confed House 145 of 152 (95%) 137 of 161 (85%) 8 of 91 (9%) 0 of 11 (0%) Senate 45 of 46 (98%) 27 of 32 (84%) 1 of 21 (5%) 0 of 1 (0%)
This gives an example of Simpson's Paradox. In both the north and the south, the bill had stronger support among Democrats than Republicans. However, aggregating over region leads to the first table, which gives the reverse impression that Republicans supported the bill more strongly. The explanation is that the Democrats were concentrated in the south