[EM] A computationally feasible method (algorithmic redistricting)

[Raph Frank]

On 9/1/08, Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km-elmet at broadpark.no> wrote:
>  Those maps could be pruned so that only the Pareto front remains. That is,
> if there's some map that's worse on all metrics with regards to some other
> map, then that first map isn't included. As long as there are enough metrics
> to give a reasonable choice on the Pareto front, this should exclude the
> worst of the gerrymandered proposals and keep the voters from being swamped
> with millions of frivolous proposals.

Maybe, the best way would be to include the best maps via lots of
different measures.

>  I don't think it's necessary to make it that complex, though. If you favor
> actual people doing the final choice, an independent commission (like the
> redistribution commissions of Canada and Australia) could make the choice of
> which nondominated map to use.

The real problem is that power that that commission has.  If the
districting map has more influence on the result than the voters, then
there is a problem.

Multimember districts are much less effected by districting.

However, even then, disliked independents can be eliminated by drawing
a line right through their support base.

That is another possible way that voters could choose their districts.

Have each voter vote for 1 candidate.  Have the lines drawn so that
they try to keep groups of voters that vote for the same candidate in
the same district.