Russel Sage Foundation

Mathematicians Daniel Goroff of Harvey Mudd College and Daniel Ullman of George Washington University make the case that since statistics, computer science, and mathematics have played a role in manipulating voting district boundaries, perhaps similar methods could also be used to improve the system. They used this award from the Foundation to organize a special session at the American Mathematical Society’s (AMS) Annual Meeting in January 2009 and discuss solutions to the political distortion of voting districts.

Fifteen speakers presented at “The Redistricting Problem” meeting to present theoretical and practical evidence about how to develop a more democratic districting solution. Daniel Ullman investigated mathematical formalizations of drawing Congressional district lines. Richard Pildes, New York University, explored the relationship between social science, law, and policy in the design of election districts. Sam Hirsch, Jenner & Block, LLP, called for judicial intervention to look into institutional design of election districts. Micah Altman, Harvard University, examined how unintended political consequences occur when institutions attempt to apply simple rules to the creation of districts. Michael McDonald, George Mason University, used a two-year mapping project of 14,000 districts in five midwestern states to identify how seemingly neutral criteria can often favor a political party. Nathaniel Persily, Columbia University, studied how the role of math, CAD, and various algorithms affect the redistricting process. James Snyder, Harvard University, examined how redistricting reduces electoral competition bias outcomes in favor of a party, or favor or hurt particular groups of voters. Zeph Landau, Ilona Yershov, and Oneil Reid, University of California, Berkeley, spoke about how boundary lines in districts affect the way a political party will win an election. Christopher Chambers and Alan Miller, California Institute of Technology, introduced a path-based measure of convexity to be used in assessing the compactness of legislative districts. Jonathan Katz, California Institute of Technology, focused on “racial redistricting” and racial fairness on legislative maps. Michael Teitelbaum, Sloan Foundation, discussed some of the historical, demographic, political, and technological forces that have affected redistricting practices over the past three to four decades. Richard Freeman, NBER, focused on the need to find a better technique (other than redistricting) in order to create greater competitiveness in political races. Charles Hampton, The College of Wooster, ended the conference with his talk on the challenges he faced when amending the Ohio Constitution and when he helped draw district lines for California.

Goroff and Ullman intend to collect papers for a volume, with possible RSF publication.