Gauging Gerrymandering in Pennsylvania

IF 0.6 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE COMMONWEALTH & COMPARATIVE POLITICS Pub Date : 2023-01-30 DOI:10.15367/com.v22i1.640
J. Russell, Benjamin Lieberman
{"title":"Gauging Gerrymandering in Pennsylvania","authors":"J. Russell, Benjamin Lieberman","doi":"10.15367/com.v22i1.640","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is currently no widely accepted standard method to determine whether gerrymandering has occurred. To determine a cutoff for unreasonable gerrymandering, simulating collections of districting plans in the absence of partisan bias has been proposed. In simulation-based methods, real-world election outcomes are compared to results from simulated districting plans. Here, a simulation method that creates possible districts in continuous space is proposed. Existing methods use preliminary spatial discretization of the state to perform simulations. This spatial discretization can result in biased estimates, which could lead to inaccurate conclusions regarding gerrymandering. We use our continuous-space method to analyze the political districts in Pennsylvania. All of our simulated elections result in fewer than 13 Republican seats, indicating that the districting plan used in Pennsylvania prior to 2018 was likely gerrymandered. This finding agrees with and confirms the results of simulation-based discrete-space gerrymandering studies without the presence of discretization bias.","PeriodicalId":46038,"journal":{"name":"COMMONWEALTH & COMPARATIVE POLITICS","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMMONWEALTH & COMPARATIVE POLITICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15367/com.v22i1.640","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is currently no widely accepted standard method to determine whether gerrymandering has occurred. To determine a cutoff for unreasonable gerrymandering, simulating collections of districting plans in the absence of partisan bias has been proposed. In simulation-based methods, real-world election outcomes are compared to results from simulated districting plans. Here, a simulation method that creates possible districts in continuous space is proposed. Existing methods use preliminary spatial discretization of the state to perform simulations. This spatial discretization can result in biased estimates, which could lead to inaccurate conclusions regarding gerrymandering. We use our continuous-space method to analyze the political districts in Pennsylvania. All of our simulated elections result in fewer than 13 Republican seats, indicating that the districting plan used in Pennsylvania prior to 2018 was likely gerrymandered. This finding agrees with and confirms the results of simulation-based discrete-space gerrymandering studies without the presence of discretization bias.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宾夕法尼亚州的选区划分不公
目前还没有被广泛接受的标准方法来确定是否发生了不公正的选区划分。为了确定不合理的选区划分的界限,有人提议在没有党派偏见的情况下模拟分区计划的收集。在基于模拟的方法中,将真实的选举结果与模拟分区计划的结果进行比较。本文提出了一种在连续空间中创建可能区域的仿真方法。现有的方法使用状态的初步空间离散化来进行模拟。这种空间离散化可能导致有偏见的估计,这可能导致关于不公正划分的不准确结论。我们使用连续空间方法来分析宾夕法尼亚州的政治选区。我们所有的模拟选举结果都不到13个共和党席位,这表明宾夕法尼亚州在2018年之前使用的分区计划可能是不公正的。这一发现与基于模拟的离散空间gerrymandering研究结果一致,并证实了不存在离散化偏差的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Long established as the leading publication in its field, the journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics contains scholarly articles which both report original research on the politics of Commonwealth countries and relate their findings to issues of general significance for students of comparative politics. The journal also publishes work on the politics of other states where such work is of interest for comparative politics generally or where it enables comparisons to be made with Commonwealth countries.
期刊最新文献
Batman saves the Congo: how celebrities disrupt the politics of development Batman saves the Congo: how celebrities disrupt the politics of development , by Alexandra Cosima Budabin and Lisa Ann Richey, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 2021, xxviii + 301 pp., $27 (paperback), ISBN 9781517907594 Remembering African labor migration to the Second World: Socialist mobilities between Angola, Mozambique, and East Germany Remembering African labor migration to the Second World: Socialist mobilities between Angola, Mozambique, and East Germany , by Marcia Schenck, Springer, 2022, xxvii + 377, $49.99 (softcover), ISBN 9783031067785 Everyday state and democracy in Africa: ethnographic encounters Everyday state and democracy in Africa: ethnographic encounters , edited by Wale Adebanwi, Athens, Ohio, Ohio University Press, 2022, 427 pp., $39.95, ISBN 9780821424902 Patchwork Leviathan: pockets of bureaucratic effectiveness in developing states Patchwork Leviathan: pockets of bureaucratic effectiveness in developing states , by Erin Metz McDonnell, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2020, xvii + 290 pp., $115.00/£95.00 (hardback), ISBN 9780691197357 Churchill and India: manipulation or betrayal Churchill and India: manipulation or betrayal , by Kishan S. Rana, London, Routledge, 2023, xxii+192 pp., $136 (hardback), ISBN 9781032467399
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1