[EM] solving the NP-hard problem? no. The CRV approach to gerrymandering.

[Warren Smith]

I believe the brute force approach of just solving the NP-hard redistricting problem
perfectly, is not feasible.  There are probably ten-thousands of census blocks
and exponential runtimes with that much input just do not happen, even with
all the computer power on the planet on your side.


Occasionally it is possible to reduce the growth constant in the exponential
to incredibly small values, but I doubt that is the case here, and even
if it were, then we could not be sure it would always work after the census
data changed next time.

Also, even if exact solve were possible, then there would be a lot of subjective
input about "transportation lanes" etc.

The CRV web site now proposes a redistricting scheme that totally prevents gerrymandering,
is simple, produces nice-shaped districts.  Click "Ballot Initiative"
or "gerrymandering" on the CRV page
   http://math.temple.edu/~wds/crv/RangeVoting.html
It is in fact  an outgrowth of ideas on EM that were brought to my attention
by Adam Tarr, but it does not involve subjective input nor does it require
doing anything NP-hard.

I continue to recommend joining CRV.  It is now possible to do so *both* by
joining the Range Voting email list at 
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RangeVoting/
*or* by joining CRV itself to try to help with our action campaigns in the future
(click "join/volunteer" on the CRV web page)

-wds