IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcsosc/v5y2022i1d10.1007_s42001-021-00119-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Colorado in context: Congressional redistricting and competing fairness criteria in Colorado

Author

Listed:
  • Jeanne Clelland

    (University of Colorado Boulder)

  • Haley Colgate

    (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

  • Daryl DeFord

    (Washington State University)

  • Beth Malmskog

    (Colorado College)

  • Flavia Sancier-Barbosa

    (Colorado College)

Abstract

In this paper, we apply techniques of ensemble analysis to understand the political baseline for Congressional representation in Colorado. We generate a large random sample of reasonable redistricting plans and determine the partisan balance of each district using returns from state-wide elections in 2018, and analyze the 2011/2012 enacted districts in this context. Colorado recently adopted a new framework for redistricting, creating an independent commission to draw district boundaries, prohibiting partisan bias and incumbency considerations, requiring that political boundaries (such as counties) be preserved as much as possible, and also requiring that mapmakers maximize the number of competitive districts. We investigate the relationships between partisan outcomes, number of counties which are split, and number of competitive districts in a plan. This paper also features two novel improvements in methodology—a more rigorous statistical framework for understanding necessary sample size, and a weighted-graph method for generating random plans which split approximately as few counties as acceptable human-drawn maps.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeanne Clelland & Haley Colgate & Daryl DeFord & Beth Malmskog & Flavia Sancier-Barbosa, 2022. "Colorado in context: Congressional redistricting and competing fairness criteria in Colorado," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 189-226, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:5:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s42001-021-00119-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s42001-021-00119-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42001-021-00119-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42001-021-00119-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daryl DeFord & Moon Duchin & Justin Solomon, 2020. "A Computational Approach to Measuring Vote Elasticity and Competitiveness," Statistics and Public Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 69-86, January.
    2. Chen, Jowei & Rodden, Jonathan, 2013. "Unintentional Gerrymandering: Political Geography and Electoral Bias in Legislatures," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 8(3), pages 239-269, June.
    3. Gregory Herschlag & Han Sung Kang & Justin Luo & Christy Vaughn Graves & Sachet Bangia & Robert Ravier & Jonathan C. Mattingly, 2020. "Quantifying Gerrymandering in North Carolina," Statistics and Public Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 30-38, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarah Cannon & Ari Goldbloom-Helzner & Varun Gupta & JN Matthews & Bhushan Suwal, 2023. "Voting Rights, Markov Chains, and Optimization by Short Bursts," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 1-38, March.
    2. Kiera W. Dobbs & Rahul Swamy & Douglas M. King & Ian G. Ludden & Sheldon H. Jacobson, 2024. "An Optimization Case Study in Analyzing Missouri Redistricting," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 54(2), pages 162-187, March.
    3. Mattozzi, Andrea & Snowberg, Erik, 2018. "The right type of legislator: A theory of taxation and representation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 54-65.
    4. Potrafke, Niklas & Roesel, Felix, 2020. "The urban–rural gap in healthcare infrastructure: does government ideology matter?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 54(3), pages 340-351.
    5. Swamy, Rahul & King, Douglas M. & Ludden, Ian G. & Dobbs, Kiera W. & Jacobson, Sheldon H., 2024. "A practical optimization framework for political redistricting: A case study in Arizona," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    6. Acuff, Christopher, 2022. "Beyond the City-County Divide: Examining Consolidation Referenda Since 2000," SocArXiv pb7ug, Center for Open Science.
    7. Cho, Wendy K. Tam & Liu, Yan Y., 2018. "Sampling from complicated and unknown distributions," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 506(C), pages 170-178.
    8. Barry Burden & Corwin Smidt, 2020. "Evaluating Legislative Districts Using Measures of Partisan Bias and Simulations," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, December.
    9. Mario Chacón & Jeffrey Jensen, 2017. "The institutional determinants of Southern secession," Working Papers 2017/16, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    10. Hyytinen, Ari & Saarimaa, Tuukka & Tukiainen, Janne, 2014. "Electoral vulnerability and size of local governments: Evidence from voting on municipal mergers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 193-204.
    11. Benadè, Gerdus & Ho-Nguyen, Nam & Hooker, J.N., 2022. "Political districting without geography," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
    12. Christian Haas & Lee Hachadoorian & Steven O Kimbrough & Peter Miller & Frederic Murphy, 2020. "Seed-Fill-Shift-Repair: A redistricting heuristic for civic deliberation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-34, September.
    13. David K. Levine & Andrea Mattozzi, 2020. "Voter Turnout with Peer Punishment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(10), pages 3298-3314, October.
    14. Amy Pond, 2021. "Biased politicians and independent agencies," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(3), pages 279-299, July.
    15. Balázs R Sziklai & Károly Héberger, 2020. "Apportionment and districting by Sum of Ranking Differences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, March.
    16. Mario Chacon & Jeffrey Jensen, 2017. "The Institutional Determinants of Southern Secession," Working Papers 20170001, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Mar 2017.
    17. Niklas Potrafke, 2018. "Government ideology and economic policy-making in the United States—a survey," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 145-207, January.
    18. Thomas Choate & John A Weymark & Alan E Wiseman, 2019. "Partisan strength and legislative bargaining," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 31(1), pages 6-45, January.
    19. Amariah Becker & Dara Gold, 2022. "The gameability of redistricting criteria," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1735-1777, November.
    20. Christopher Warshaw & Eric McGhee & Michal Migurski, 2022. "Districts for a New Decade—Partisan Outcomes and Racial Representation in the 2021–22 Redistricting Cycle," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 52(3), pages 428-451.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:5:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s42001-021-00119-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.