Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2308.07414

Votemandering: Strategies and Fairness in Political Redistricting

Sanyukta Deshpande·Ian G Ludden·Sheldon H Jacobson
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Gerrymandering, the deliberate manipulation of electoral district boundaries for political advantage, is a persistent issue in U.S. redistricting cycles. This paper introduces and analyzes a new phenomenon, 'votemandering'- a strategic blend of gerrymandering and targeted political campaigning, devised to gain more seats by circumventing fairness measures. It leverages accurate demographic and socio-political data to influence voter decisions, bolstered by advancements in technology and data analytics, and executes better-informed redistricting. Votemandering is established as a Mixed Integer Program (MIP) that performs fairness-constrained gerrymandering over multiple election rounds, via unit-specific variables for campaigns. To combat votemandering, we present a computationally efficient heuristic for creating and testing district maps that more robustly preserve voter preferences. We analyze the influence of various redistricting constraints and parameters on votemandering efficacy. We explore the interconnectedness of gerrymandering, substantial campaign budgets, and strategic campaigning, illustrating their collective potential to generate biased electoral maps. A Wisconsin State Senate redistricting case study substantiates our findings on real data, demonstrating how major parties can secure additional seats through votemandering. Our findings underscore the practical implications of these manipulations, stressing the need for informed policy and regulation to safeguard democratic processes.

Explore related subjects

cs.GT

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Sanyukta Deshpande, Ian G Ludden, Sheldon H Jacobson. 2023-08-14. Votemandering: Strategies and Fairness in Political Redistricting. https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.07414

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

MMS Allocation for Chores with Online Agent Arrivals

We study the fair allocation of $m$ indivisible chores to $n$ agents with subadditive cost functions arriving online in an arbitrary order. Upon an agent's arrival, we are informed of her cost function and must irrevocably assign her a set of chores. We focus on the Maximin Share (MMS) fairness notion and aim to compute an allocation in which all items are assigned, and no agent incurs a cost more than $\alpha$ times her MMS. Without any prior information about the instance (other than $n$ and $m$), we design an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{n, k\log^{1+\epsilon}k, \log m\})$ for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, where $k$ denotes the number of cost function types. Our bound matches the best known offline approximation guarantees for MMS under subadditive costs and is nearly optimal with respect to all three parameters: we show that even for binary additive cost functions, no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio of $o(\min\{n, k\log k, \log m\})$. We then consider the setting in which the $k$ cost function types are known in advance (though the realized types of arriving agents are not). For additive cost functions, we provide an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{\log k, \log(kn)/\log\log(kn)\})$, and show that constant-competitive algorithms do not exist for general $k$, even for the binary additive setting. For binary additive functions when $k \le n$, we propose a $3$-competitive algorithm and establish a lower bound of $2$.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2026

Truncated Noisy Best-Response Algorithms: Toward Game Theoretic Learning with Safety Guarantees

We consider a game theoretic approach to solve multi-agent coordination problems with submodular maximization objectives. It is known for such problems that the Nash equilibria for the corresponding game are always within 50% of the optimal, but that the equilibria which achieve this worst-case bound are not stable. To exploit this instability, we propose a family of algorithms which we call Truncated Noisy Best-Response (TNBR) Algorithms. These algorithms are flexibly characterized by agents asynchronously and stochastically selecting actions from a neighbourhood of their best response payoffs. We compute bounds on the recurrent classes of TNBR algorithms' associated Markov chains. Our bounds fall into two categories: first, "Performance" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms always have a high-value recurrent state; second, "Safety" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms never have arbitrarily-bad recurrent states. Furthermore, these two types of bounds are linked by a waterbed-like effect: every game with a poor Safety guarantee necessarily has a favorable Performance guarantee.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2026

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT↗