Government // Open Government
Commentary
8/7/2014
02:05 PM
David F Carr
David F Carr
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Wanted: Honest Algorithms For Voter Redistricting

Why can't a simple formula replace the politically charged gerrymandering that's skewing our election processes?

When drawing new districts for Congress and the State Legislature, Florida has what sounds like a simple rule: "Districts shall be as nearly equal in population as is practicable; districts shall be compact; and districts shall, where feasible, utilize existing political and geographical boundaries."

Yet as I write this, the Legislature is meeting in special session to address a judge's ruling that lawmakers "made a mockery" of the redistricting procedure when they drew new maps in 2012, tilting them in favor of the Republican majority. Under the ruling, legislators must now redraw at least two districts -- potentially forcing elections in the affected areas to be postponed until after November.

In 2010, I campaigned for the FairDistricts amendment to the Florida constitution, which included the anti-gerrymandering rule quoted above, stating that districts should be compact. There was more to the legal language, of course, including clauses designed to avoid conflicts with other state and federal laws. But I thought the principles were pretty clear. While gathering petition signatures outside the library to get the measure on the ballot, I kept a map of some of the odder jigsaw puzzle piece districts in Florida taped to the reverse side of my clipboard. "What it will mean, if this passes," I would tell people, "is that districts will be neat little squares, pretty much, instead of crazy squiggles."

[Government innovation doesn't have to be an oxymoron, as long as it's based on open source principles. Read Federal IT Innovation Depends On Being Open.]

And yet somehow the redistricting process, following passage of the amendment, still produced this:

That is Congressional District 5, which stretches from Jacksonville to Orlando, a length from tip to tail of well over 100 miles.

How did this happen? Miami Herald columnist Fred Grimm explains it pretty well: Florida lawmakers can't be trusted to put public interests over their job security. By manipulating the map, lawmakers can choose their voters rather than letting the voters choose them. Republicans can design "safe districts" for Republicans, even if as a byproduct they also create some safe Democratic districts (from the cards thrown into the discard pile).

As Grimm notes, Democratic lawyers and their consultants have been guilty of the same sin in other states, including Florida when Democrats were in the majority. California was another example until a voter initiative moved the responsibility for redistricting to an independent commission not controlled by the Legislature. Grimm suggests Florida may need to do the same.

But why do we need a commission to implement what ought to be a simple formula? Here's the algorithm: Optimize for compact districts with an equal number of voters, matching the lines with city, county, and natural boundaries (such as rivers) where possible. Let software draw the map, with a minimum of human intervention. Yes, we'd still need humans in the loop for a sanity check (think of those times your GPS navigation system has sent you down a route that makes sense only to a computer).

Using software for redistricting would not be new -- one reason gerrymandering has gotten so rampant in recent years is that political consultants have applied geographic information systems and statistical analysis to the problem of optimizing districts for political advantage. But there is no reason the same technology couldn't be applied to optimizing for fair and even representation.

I'm not the first person to think of this. Via a Washington Post Wonkblog column, I learned of the open source compact district optimization software that Brian Olson created in his spare time. A Florida Congressional map created from 2010 census data would look like this:

Hypothetical compact Florida Congressional districts (source: bdistricting.com)
Hypothetical compact Florida Congressional districts (source: bdistricting.com)

Neat little boxes -- that's what all lovers of Democracy should want, right?

Maybe not. District 5 was drawn to be a "minority majority" district, effectively a safe district for Rep. Corrine Brown, who is black, because of its concentration of black and minority voters. However, Leon County Circuit Judge Terry Lewis ruled that the way the legislature separated white from black -- in the process separating Republican-leaning and Democratic-leaning populations -- was unfair and biased. As Politico reports, Democratic support for the lawsuit challenging the districts has drawn the ire of the Congressional Black Caucus, which sees it as a threat to Rep. Brown's smooth reelection.

While Florida's redistricting ballot initiative was supposed to be non-partisan, it was backed more enthusiastically by Democrats, who have been the minority party in the Legislature for decades now (gerrymandering was more fun for them when they were in the majority). To preserve the support of black Democrats -- or at least prevent them from actively opposing the FairDistricts initiative -- the authors of the amendment slipped in this language: "Districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process or to diminish their ability to elect representatives of their choice."

That provides some wiggle room for district lines that preserve concentrations of minority groups, even if they aren't neat little boxes. But I believe that using it to justify the shape of District 5 is too much of a stretch, and the judge thought so, too.

In explaining the thinking behind his algorithm to optimize for compactness, Brian Olson addresses some of the justifications for applying human judgment to the drawing of districts and why he finds them unconvincing.

Some might consider drawing the lines for minority majority representation or to preserve communities of interest to be "good gerrymandering," but somehow instances of "bad gerrymandering" always seems to outnumber good. "Until we clean up our representative democracy to give us better representation I think we should take away the map pen and make redistricting fully automatic and impartial," he writes.

What do you think? Which would you trust more -- an open source algorithm or your state representatives?

Mixing public and private can deliver the best of both cloud worlds. But beware management complexity, cost volatility, data protection, and other potential snafus. Get the new Hybrid Cloud Gotchas Tech Digest today. (Free registration required.)

David F. Carr oversees InformationWeek's coverage of government and healthcare IT. He previously led coverage of social business and education technologies and continues to contribute in those areas. He is the editor of Social Collaboration for Dummies (Wiley, Oct. 2013) and ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
happyjack27
50%
50%
happyjack27,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/5/2015 | 12:38:11 PM
Re: Using redistricting optimizing algorithms for good rather than evil
If you are asking for just 1 rule, then yes, it is too much to ask.  It cannot be reduced to a single rule.   It can, however, be reduced to a small handful of rules.  Such as:

Practicalitly rules

-------------------

1. Contiguency (aka connectedness)

2. compactness (harder to represent a squiggly district)

3. equal population (this is NOT a fairness criteria - its so there isn't undue burden on the representative.)

 

Fairness rules

-----------------

4. proportional representation (the composition of those elected should mirror that of the voters)

5. equal voting power balance. (each person's vote should have about the same impact on the final composition of the elected body)

 

So then yes, there are FIVE simple rules for an algorithm.  But this is pretty much a minimal set - you can't remove one and still have a good result. A fuller description of these rules is availalbe here (forgive the messiness / incompleteness - its a bit of a work in progress)   https://github.com/happyjack27/autoredistrict/blob/master/tutorials/tutorial_text.txt

 
happyjack27
50%
50%
happyjack27,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/5/2015 | 12:22:21 PM
Re: Know your enemy
He who writes the algorithm does hold all the power - as far as people go.  But the data shares a lot of the power.  Nonetheless, it is not misplaced.  data + algorihtm = output.  quite simple.  if there is a third variable, it's random variation.

The question is then, who should write the algorihtm, and/or what should the algorithm be?

This is why the code must be open-source, and people qualified in evaluating the algorithm, such as people who are good at math, shoudl be involved.  And two criteria must be included in the algorithm: proportional representation and voting power balance.

In any case, make no mistake: the algorithm is boss.
happyjack27
50%
50%
happyjack27,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/5/2015 | 12:14:09 PM
Re: Know your enemy
Occam'z Razor: "The simplest explanation is most likely correct."  Key word here: "likely".  If we were, for example, to only use the criteria of equal population, and then select a map at random from all the possible permutations, and then if it doesn't meet that throw it out and re-pick, until we get one that meets that, the map that we end up with will, due to the law of large numbers, have most districts be proportioned in about the same way as the entire state.  That is, if the total popular vote is about 60% for one party, then the individual districts will all be about 60% for that party, too. (since as the sample size N gets larger, it regresses towards the population mean, with smaller and smaller variance, and since we're counting people, N is very large.)  So in almost all districts, the majority vote will be for the party that has the majority in the total population.  Which means that party will get almost 100% of the seats.  Even though they only got 60% of the popular vote.
happyjack27
50%
50%
happyjack27,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/5/2015 | 11:53:34 AM
here is an honest algorithm for voter redistricting
In my spare time i've been working on an algorithm to do fair re-districting, fully automated.   The full source code (along with an executable) is available here: https://github.com/happyjack27/autoredistrict  basically it uses the genetic algorithm to optimize 5 criteria: compactness, equal population, connectedness, proportional representation, and voting power balance.
Li Tan
50%
50%
Li Tan,
User Rank: Ninja
8/9/2014 | 11:01:34 AM
Re: Piano Teacher Redistricted Better than Pennsylvania Legislature
Good spot - actually I think the reason of the dilemma is that, the higher the level of the people, the more complicated the matter becomes.:-) Even the simple things get complicated when it comes to politians.:-)
joebaker
100%
0%
joebaker,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/8/2014 | 1:27:10 PM
Re: What about existing boundaries, like town and counties?
Almost all of what I'm reading and your comment especially is soooo true.  Here in Alabama, the majority Repubs are doing what the Dems did before as far as redistricting.  And the Repubs could easily justify it to the Feds for Feb approval as the minority race Dem incumbents remained almost untouched, though majority race Dems lost their "areas" or districts.  This leads to favorable conditions for crony politicians it appears.

Based on the above, I believe this is driving the so-called polarization in Congress ... because the districts are so polarized.  Candidates that make it to congress have little incentive (or perhaps the will or the mandate) to compromise for an 80% favorable result.  
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
8/8/2014 | 12:15:54 PM
Re: Know your enemy
In the Florida case, it seems the judge determined that even distribution of voters across districts ("fairness") trumped any bias toward minority representation that might be allowed under the Voting Rights Act. Hell, I'm not a lawyer. I just know that the stated rules of the game in Florida read like a fairly simple algorithm - I think people needlessly overcomplicated it.
UberGoober
0%
100%
UberGoober,
User Rank: Strategist
8/8/2014 | 11:59:35 AM
Re: Know your enemy
I know straw men are easier to kill than the real thing, but I dont' believe I used the phrase 'all the power.'  While I'll posit that a district as egregious as either of our examples would be obvious, I think you would have to allow that the move of a neighborhood here or there can significantly change the makeup of a district, and could be very hard to spot.  One would assume that any such program would keep state and local (city, county,school) districts together as much as possilbe, otherwise you would have multiple districts within a precienct, or multiple local jurisdictins, and either of those would cause a nearly unsurmountable problem for the local voting authorities.


And if you believe that the actual source code and raw data for any redistricting program would be available to the public, I'd ask you to do a little research on VA waiting lists, or the Obamacare web site.  The gubmint is made up of people, and contrary to the hopes and wishes of people who believe that it is full of unbiased technocrats who have only the good of the people in their minds and hearts, they are just as likely to lie, cheat, and manipulate as the denizens of any evil mulitnational corporation.  Just ask Lois Lerner...

But all that is moot anyway. No such scheme could never make it past the Voting Rights Act as currently written and enforced since it would dilute minority representation dramatically. You're not against the Voting Rights Act, are you?
Number 6
50%
50%
Number 6,
User Rank: Moderator
8/8/2014 | 10:54:09 AM
Piano Teacher Redistricted Better than Pennsylvania Legislature
An average citizen with low-tech tools did a better job of redistricting than the politicians.  Gee, what a surprise.  See one of many stories about Amanda Holt here:

http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2012/12/amanda_holt_is_pennsylvanias_citizen_activist_of_the_year.html

 
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
8/8/2014 | 10:44:22 AM
Re: Know your enemy
The concern about he who writes the algorithm holding all the power seems misplaced to me. As long as the same formula is applied to every district, there's no way you can come up with something like Florida's 5th Congressional district. Manipulation of the system becomes a lot more obvious, if every other district is compact and one or two are way out of whack.
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Time to Reconsider Enterprise Email Strategy
Time to Reconsider Enterprise Email Strategy
Cost, time, and risk. It's the demand trifecta vying for the attention of both technology professionals and attorneys charged with balancing the expectations of their clients and business units with the hard reality of the current financial and regulatory climate. Sometimes, organizations assume high levels of risk as a result of their inability to meet the costs involved in data protection. In other instances, it's time that's of the essence, as with a data breach.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest August 03, 2015
The networking industry agrees that software-defined networking is the way of the future. So where are all the deployments? We take a look at where SDN is being deployed and what's getting in the way of deployments.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.