[EM] Re: Automated districting
Adam Tarr
atarr at purdue.edu
Sun Jan 11 11:20:02 PST 2004
>>However, the only objective consideration in drawing census tracks that I
>>am aware of (in the U.S.) is that they contain 5-10,000 persons, which
>>leaves census tract drawing vulnerable to political manipulation.
>
>I think this number is actually the crux of the issue. If the size of a
>census tract is far smaller than the size of the district, then I would
>argue it doesn't matter how much bias there is in how the tracts are
>defined. I think we can count on at least 10 tracts per district, as a
>conservative assumption.
In the case of congressional districts, that's a VERY conservative
assumption. The average congressional district has over 600,000 people in
it. When you have that many census tracts, manipulation of the algorithm
is simply impossible.
Consider, further, the nature of a gerrymandered district. Gerrymandering
typically produces long, sliver-shaped districts that try to capture a
particular constituent. But what to slivers have a lot of? Perimeter
length, that's what. That means lots of road connectivity to the
surrounding districts, which means it's pretty unlikely that they would be
split apart by this algorithm. Which means the gerrymandering tends to
produce no effect.
>If someone was willing to precisely define the conditions, I could
>probably code something up.
Well the first step would just be to write the basic algorithm: one that
takes a weighted graph and returns the N subgraphs that results in the
lowest total severed edge weight. You would also need to assign a
population number to each node, and require that the total solution have
roughly equal population in each sub-graph.
-Adam
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list