On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Forest Simmons wrote:
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 15:07:16 -0800 From: Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [EM] Deterministic Districting
Mike wrote ...
Well, it's not really deterministic (in the sense that the results are repeatable), but one could could put the districting maps on the ballot along with the candidate. Each candidate could provide their own districting map (or use their party's map), and have the voters decide which one they liked the best. They could then use that map in the election to count the votes for various offices.
Forest replies ...
Yes, let the candidates (and any others who want to) submit their favorite redistricting proposal, and then choose from among them, not by voting, but by applying some objective standard of compactness ... minimal total number of traffic lanes cut by the boundaries, minimal total boundary length in some appropriate metric, minimal average distance between members of the same district where the distance is some combination of cost, time, and taxicab mileage, etc.
Forest
This sounds like one of the parts of a classic set of problems in Computer Science that are like cryptography in that a solution is hard to find, but easy to verify.
So, in this sense, finding a redistricting is hard, but measuring various qualities of a proposed redistricting is easy. We push that work out to various interested parties, and get that work done "for free". Whoever comes up with the "fairest" plan gets some public notoriety, and gets their plan enacted. A good deal for all.
Brian Olson http://bolson.org/ ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
