Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

147513-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

The right to cast a meaningful vote, equal in value to other votes, is a fundamental tenet US elections. Despite the 1964 Supreme Court decision formally establishing the one person, one vote principle as a legal requirement of elections, our democracy consistently falls short of it. With mechanisms including the

The right to cast a meaningful vote, equal in value to other votes, is a fundamental tenet US elections. Despite the 1964 Supreme Court decision formally establishing the one person, one vote principle as a legal requirement of elections, our democracy consistently falls short of it. With mechanisms including the winner-take-all format in the Electoral College, disproportioned geographic allocation of senators, extreme partisan gerrymandering in the House of Representatives, and first-past-the-post elections, many voters experience severe vote dilution. <br/><br/>In order to legitimize our democratic structures, American elections should be reformed so every person’s vote has equal weight, ensuring that the election outcomes reflect the will of the people. Altering the current election structure to include more proportional structures including rank choice voting and population-based representation, will result in a democracy more compatible with the one person, one vote principle.

ContributorsSluga, Allison Leigh (Author) / Hinojosa, Magda (Thesis director) / Gartner, David (Committee member) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor, Contributor) / School of Public Affairs (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
147630-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

This paper conducts an exploration of the election policy reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic within the United States. While living through and voting during the real-time events which took place during the COVID-19 Pandemic of 2020, it soon became evident that there was not enough experience from earlier election emergencies

This paper conducts an exploration of the election policy reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic within the United States. While living through and voting during the real-time events which took place during the COVID-19 Pandemic of 2020, it soon became evident that there was not enough experience from earlier election emergencies to properly ensure against voter disenfranchisement. Given the scope of the global pandemic and the speed with which policymakers had to act, there was very little time to properly prepare. There was also great contention regarding the legitimacy of election methods proposed to alleviate in-person election concerns, such as mail-in voting. The political battle between those who believed COVID-19 to be a grave concern against those who did not consider COVID-19 to be a legitimate threat towards their livelihoods also affected policymaking decisions. Policymakers were forced into a corner, as they experienced criticism for not enough government action, as well as disapproval on the actual regulation that came to pass. This paper therefore aims to understand what factors led to the decisions which shaped the election policy which occurred as a reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic during the election year of 2020. This analysis is conducted by considering the following: prior election emergency policy; the development of reactive election policy in March, proactive policy established for the August and November elections; and a review of voter disenfranchisement which occurred due to COVID-19.

ContributorsPorritt, Sierra Joy (Author) / Hoekstra, Valerie (Thesis director) / Gaona, William (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
155931-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Gerrymandering is a central problem for many representative democracies. Formally, gerrymandering is the manipulation of spatial boundaries to provide political advantage to a particular group (Warf, 2006). The term often refers to political district design, where the boundaries of political districts are “unnaturally” manipulated by redistricting officials to generate durable

Gerrymandering is a central problem for many representative democracies. Formally, gerrymandering is the manipulation of spatial boundaries to provide political advantage to a particular group (Warf, 2006). The term often refers to political district design, where the boundaries of political districts are “unnaturally” manipulated by redistricting officials to generate durable advantages for one group or party. Since free and fair elections are possibly the critical part of representative democracy, it is important for this cresting tide to have scientifically validated tools. This dissertation supports a current wave of reform by developing a general inferential technique to “localize” inferential bias measures, generating a new type of district-level score. The new method relies on the statistical intuition behind jackknife methods to construct relative local indicators. I find that existing statewide indicators of partisan bias can be localized using this technique, providing an estimate of how strongly a district impacts statewide partisan bias over an entire decade. When compared to measures of shape compactness (a common gerrymandering detection statistic), I find that weirdly-shaped districts have no consistent relationship with impact in many states during the 2000 and 2010 redistricting plan. To ensure that this work is valid, I examine existing seats-votes modeling strategies and develop a novel method for constructing seats-votes curves. I find that, while the empirical structure of electoral swing shows significant spatial dependence (even in the face of spatial heterogeneity), existing seats-votes specifications are more robust than anticipated to spatial dependence. Centrally, this dissertation contributes to the much larger social aim to resist electoral manipulation: that individuals & organizations suffer no undue burden on political access from partisan gerrymandering.
ContributorsWolf, Levi (Author) / Rey, Sergio J (Thesis advisor) / Anselin, Luc (Committee member) / Fotheringham, A. Stewart (Committee member) / Tam Cho, Wendy K (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017