Matching Items (9)
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 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
Description
The United States is in a period of political turmoil and polarization. New technologies have matured over the last ten years, which have transformed an individual’s relationship with society and government. The emergence of these technologies has revolutionized access to both information and misinformation. Skills such as bias recognition and critical thinking are more imperative than in any other time to separate truth from false or misleading information. Meanwhile, education has not evolved with these changes. The average individual is more likely to come to uninformed conclusions and less likely to listen to differing perspectives. Moreover, technology is further complicating and compounding other issues in the political process. All of this is manifesting in division among the American people who elect more polarized politicians who increasingly fail to find avenues for compromise.
In an effort to address these trends, we founded a student organization, The Political Literates, to fight political apathy by delivering political news in an easy to understand and unbiased manner. Inspired by our experience with this organization, we combine our insights with research to paint a new perspective on the state of the American political system.
This thesis analyzes various issues identified through our observations and research, with a heavy emphasis on using examples from the 2016 election. Our focus is how new technologies like data analytics, the Internet, smartphones, and social media are changing politics by driving political and social transformation. We identify and analyze five core issues that have been amplified by new technology, hindering the effectiveness of elections and further increasing political polarization:
● Gerrymandering which skews partisan debate by forcing politicians to pander to ideologically skewed districts.
● Consolidation of media companies which affects the diversity of how news is shared.
● Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine which allowed media to become more partisan.
● The Citizens United Ruling which skews power away from average voters in elections.
● A Failing Education System which does not prepare Americans to be civically engaged and to avoid being swayed by biased or untrue media.
Based on our experiment with the Political Literates and our research, we call for improving how critical thinking and civics is taught in the American education system. Critical thought and civics must be developed pervasively. With this, more people would be able to form more sophisticated views by listening to others to learn rather than win, listening less to irrelevant information, and forming a culture with more engagement in politics. Through this re-enlightenment, many of America’s other problems may evaporate or become more actionable.
In an effort to address these trends, we founded a student organization, The Political Literates, to fight political apathy by delivering political news in an easy to understand and unbiased manner. Inspired by our experience with this organization, we combine our insights with research to paint a new perspective on the state of the American political system.
This thesis analyzes various issues identified through our observations and research, with a heavy emphasis on using examples from the 2016 election. Our focus is how new technologies like data analytics, the Internet, smartphones, and social media are changing politics by driving political and social transformation. We identify and analyze five core issues that have been amplified by new technology, hindering the effectiveness of elections and further increasing political polarization:
● Gerrymandering which skews partisan debate by forcing politicians to pander to ideologically skewed districts.
● Consolidation of media companies which affects the diversity of how news is shared.
● Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine which allowed media to become more partisan.
● The Citizens United Ruling which skews power away from average voters in elections.
● A Failing Education System which does not prepare Americans to be civically engaged and to avoid being swayed by biased or untrue media.
Based on our experiment with the Political Literates and our research, we call for improving how critical thinking and civics is taught in the American education system. Critical thought and civics must be developed pervasively. With this, more people would be able to form more sophisticated views by listening to others to learn rather than win, listening less to irrelevant information, and forming a culture with more engagement in politics. Through this re-enlightenment, many of America’s other problems may evaporate or become more actionable.
ContributorsStenseth, Kyle (Co-author) / Tumas, Trevor (Co-author) / Mokwa, Michael (Thesis director) / Eaton, John (Committee member) / Department of Information Systems (Contributor) / Department of Supply Chain Management (Contributor) / Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (Contributor) / Watts College of Public Service & Community Solut (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
This paper analyzes how varying redistricting types—state legislature, advisory commissions, political appointee commissions, and independent commissions—correlate with margins of victory. The Princeton Gerrymandering Project’s statistical tests are used to classify state legislatures that have allegedly conducted partisan gerrymandering, and this study performs a pre-test post-test analysis via graphical and tabular interpretation of election data available from CQ Press’ Voting and Elections Collection. The use of GIS technology in the 2000’s combined with research to “sometimes pack but never crack” in the 2010’s and predictable voting behavior from party polarization has accelerated gerrymandering to unprecedented heights. Partisan redistricting results in landslide victories and less districts won overall for the opposing party.
Solutions to resolve gerrymandering are outlined, such as by voters lobbying state legislatures or issuing ballot initiatives, for the Supreme Court to establish gerrymandering criteria based upon statistical tests, or from changing House elections themselves, such as moving from a winner take all system to a proportional system, or having boundaries based on municipal and county boundaries as opposed to the one person one vote requirement. Independent commissions demonstrate promise in preventing gerrymandering as shown in Arizona, however a longer-term study in the future is necessary to validate its effectiveness on increasing the competitiveness of elections. Arizona has reduced margins of victories after switching redistricting authorities, however alternate “third-party” redistricting authorities—political appointee commissions and advisory commissions, are not very different than state legislatures due to political connections with these redistricting types. The purpose of this study is to examine an aspect of gerrymandering that is simple for voters to understand and decide for themselves which redistricting type is best for their state.
Solutions to resolve gerrymandering are outlined, such as by voters lobbying state legislatures or issuing ballot initiatives, for the Supreme Court to establish gerrymandering criteria based upon statistical tests, or from changing House elections themselves, such as moving from a winner take all system to a proportional system, or having boundaries based on municipal and county boundaries as opposed to the one person one vote requirement. Independent commissions demonstrate promise in preventing gerrymandering as shown in Arizona, however a longer-term study in the future is necessary to validate its effectiveness on increasing the competitiveness of elections. Arizona has reduced margins of victories after switching redistricting authorities, however alternate “third-party” redistricting authorities—political appointee commissions and advisory commissions, are not very different than state legislatures due to political connections with these redistricting types. The purpose of this study is to examine an aspect of gerrymandering that is simple for voters to understand and decide for themselves which redistricting type is best for their state.
ContributorsMills, Robert William (Author) / Woodall, Gina (Thesis director) / Ramirez, Mark (Committee member) / Department of Information Systems (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-12
Description
This project offers an argument that isolates several major forces that it contends pose a critical threat to the endurance of modern American democracy. It evaluates modern and classic political philosophy to identify the prerequisites for a stable democracy, identifying and defining voter education and participation as necessary contributors to civic engagement. It provides a socio-legal framework for evaluating four phenomena that have shifted in their impact on politics over the past 20 years: the roles of money and media in politics, as well as disenfranchisement by gerrymandering and by felon voting restrictions. It demonstrates how each has a new and worsening impact on voter education and/or participation, thus threatening the continued existence of modern American democracy.
ContributorsBurnquist, Andrew (Co-author) / Morote, Nicole (Co-author) / Mason, Maria (Co-author) / Affolter, Jacob (Thesis director) / Hoekstra, Valeria (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
This project offers an argument that isolates several major forces that it contends pose a critical threat to the endurance of modern American democracy. It evaluates modern and classic political philosophy to identify the prerequisites for a stable democracy, identifying and defining voter education and participation as necessary contributors to civic engagement. It provides a socio-legal framework for evaluating four phenomena that have shifted in their impact on politics over the past 20 years: the roles of money and media in politics, as well as disenfranchisement by gerrymandering and by felon voting restrictions. It demonstrates how each has a new and worsening impact on voter education and/or participation, thus threatening the continued existence of modern American democracy.
ContributorsMason, Maria (Co-author) / Morote, Nicole (Co-author) / Burnquist, Andrew (Co-author) / Affolter, Jacob (Thesis director) / Hoekstra, Valerie (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
Description
ABSTRACT
The right to vote is widely considered as one of the fundamental pillars of a democratic society. Throughout the history of the United States, this pillar has gradually grown in strength as voting has become a far more inclusive and accessible exertion of political power and expression of political will. Currently in the United States, for the first time in decades, that pillar is slowly yet steadily eroding. There is a narrative, one that has been cultivated and carefully constructed for centuries, that the United States is a bastion of democracy. Although various groups have been oppressed and excluded from the voting franchise historically, the narrative promotes the idea that the right to vote is now fully enjoyed. But what does “the right” to vote really mean? Additionally, is the narrative that the United States is a true democracy with robust voter protections a reality, or is it a deceptive tactic meant to shroud the fact that voter power is undeniably waning?
This paper challenges that narrative, as well as argues that having “the right” to vote is hollow. The power of voters has always been diluted by the blanket exclusion of certain groups. Currently, however, the power of voters is being diluted by various forms of political, legal, and financial manipulation. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, and big money all contribute to the distortion and destruction of democracy in the United States, preventing it from fully realizing the ideals that have, ostensibly, guided it since its inception. This paper will examine each of these forms in terms of their history, their implementation, and their effects and consequences on voter power, as well as their influence on democracy in the United States as a whole. Additionally, this paper analyzes the potential solutions to these pernicious forms of voter dilution, seeking to discover if democracy in the United States can avoid becoming unrecognizable from the narrative that has supported it for centuries.
The right to vote is widely considered as one of the fundamental pillars of a democratic society. Throughout the history of the United States, this pillar has gradually grown in strength as voting has become a far more inclusive and accessible exertion of political power and expression of political will. Currently in the United States, for the first time in decades, that pillar is slowly yet steadily eroding. There is a narrative, one that has been cultivated and carefully constructed for centuries, that the United States is a bastion of democracy. Although various groups have been oppressed and excluded from the voting franchise historically, the narrative promotes the idea that the right to vote is now fully enjoyed. But what does “the right” to vote really mean? Additionally, is the narrative that the United States is a true democracy with robust voter protections a reality, or is it a deceptive tactic meant to shroud the fact that voter power is undeniably waning?
This paper challenges that narrative, as well as argues that having “the right” to vote is hollow. The power of voters has always been diluted by the blanket exclusion of certain groups. Currently, however, the power of voters is being diluted by various forms of political, legal, and financial manipulation. Gerrymandering, voter suppression, and big money all contribute to the distortion and destruction of democracy in the United States, preventing it from fully realizing the ideals that have, ostensibly, guided it since its inception. This paper will examine each of these forms in terms of their history, their implementation, and their effects and consequences on voter power, as well as their influence on democracy in the United States as a whole. Additionally, this paper analyzes the potential solutions to these pernicious forms of voter dilution, seeking to discover if democracy in the United States can avoid becoming unrecognizable from the narrative that has supported it for centuries.
ContributorsBeal, Peyton Alexander (Author) / Lennon, Tara (Thesis director) / Switzer, Heather (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-12
Description
Gerrymandering involves the purposeful manipulation of districts in order to gain some political advantage. Because legislators have a vested interest in continuing their tenure, they can easily hijack the redistricting process each decade for their and their political party's benefit. This threatens the cornerstone of democracy: a voter’s capability to select an elected official that accurately represents their interests. Instead, gerrymandering has legislators to choose their voters.
In recent years, the Supreme Court has heard challenges to state legislature-drawn districts, most recently in Allen v. Milligan for Alabama and Moore v. Harper for North Carolina. The highest court of the United States ruled that the two state maps were gerrymandered, and in coming to their decision, the 9 justices relied on a plethora of amicus briefs- one of which included the Markov Chain Monte Carlo method, a computational method used to find gerrymandering.
Because of how widespread gerrymandering has become on both sides of the political aisle, states have moved to create independent redistricting commissions. Qualitative research regarding the efficacy of independent commissions is present, but there is little research using the quantitative computational methods from these SCOTUS cases. As a result, my thesis will use the Markov Chain Monte Carlo method to answer if impartial redistricting commissions (like we have in Arizona) actually preclude unfair redistricting practices.
My completed project is located here:
https://dheetideliwala.github.io/honors-thesis/
ContributorsDeliwala, Dheeti (Author) / Bryan, Chris (Thesis director) / Strickland, James (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Computer Science and Engineering Program (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2023-12
ContributorsDeliwala, Dheeti (Author) / Bryan, Chris (Thesis director) / Strickland, James (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Computer Science and Engineering Program (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2023-12
ContributorsDeliwala, Dheeti (Author) / Bryan, Chris (Thesis director) / Strickland, James (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Computer Science and Engineering Program (Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor)
Created2023-12