Where is the problem if people are being represented in the fashion they have chosen?

A very substantive article with some disturbing implicit questions; Is segregation the problem in Ferguson? by Jonathan Rodden.

Rodden is dealing with the immediate issues arising from the riots in Fergusson, Missouri but his research has significant implications. His first argument is a complete demolition of the hypothesis that there are riots in Fergusson because it is so segregated. In fact, as Rodden makes clear, it is one of the most integrated communities in the US.

While most of St. Louis County’s residents live in municipalities that are either homogeneous or internally segregated or both, Ferguson and its North County neighbors stand out for their relative heterogeneity and internal desegregation. Moreover, the income gap between blacks and whites is smaller in these municipalities than elsewhere.

Racial segregation and income inequality have been favored explanations among the clerissy for any societal woes. From Rodden's evidence, it appears that there is little causative relationship. He notes that:

Racial segregation is declining rapidly in the United States, and North St. Louis County is ground zero. For those who see value in the preservation of sustainable multiracial neighborhoods, the low-slung middle-class suburban houses of Ferguson and Florissant might be as good as it gets in the United States.

He offers an alternate explanation.

The immediate problem in Ferguson is neither residential segregation nor its demise. Rather, as many have pointed out, it is that the racial integration of the community has not been reflected in the municipal government and police force, whose racial composition still reflects the status quo of the 1980s.

At one level that makes a sort of sense. On the other hand, I wrestle with the reality that elections happen every two or four years. If there were issues, you would have expected, absent some blatant gerrymandering, for political power to have shifted. The residents of Fergusson have the government that they elected. How is that a problem?

The really startling observation is about why and how entrenched power structures prove unresponsive to demographic change.

Recent research by political scientists has shown that small but well-organized interest groups, such as unionized teachers and municipal workers, benefit handsomely from low-turnout off-cycle elections. Historically, off-cycle elections have been a favored strategy of established ethnic groups in American cities who wished to keep immigrants and minorities out of power. In North St. Louis County, the most organized groups are white homeowners who have been in the same neighborhood since the 1970s, along with police officers and municipal employees who benefit from the status quo, and they have been able to dominate local elections.

Essentially Rodden is saying that unionized government workers (teachers, municipal workers, and police officers) are the mechanism which prevents local government from being responsive to residents. This is a claim long made by conservatives and it is surprising to find it so blatantly made and supported in an MSM organ such as the Washington Post.

The implied observation that is not made explicit is that teacher, municipal worker, and police unions, which are overwhelmingly affiliated with the Democrat Party are the cause of the power imbalance in Fergusson (and elsewhere).

I accept Rodden's argument to some degree. I find it likely that there are entrenched interests and in a small municipality such as Fergusson, the various unions are likely a material, if not deciding, factor. I still can't work my way past the fact that there have been many elections since Fergusson became majority minority. Where is the problem if people are being represented in the fashion they have chosen?