The census has been a staple in the United States government since Washington's presidency. The sixth line of the Constitution introduces the idea of ​​counting the population to create a fair and representative government: “The actual enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within each subsequent term of ten years, in the manner established by law." Since then, the census has been used not only to choose the number of representatives for the states, but also to redistrict and determine county boundaries. Redistricting is a necessary process for our government to function smoothly and ensure fairness among states with diverse populations. Redistricting should therefore be an impartial matter and should be conducted by a third party whose sole interest is the creation of fairgrounds. The power to redistrict lies in the hands of the state legislature, which is then approved by the governor. If one party holds power, it is very easy for that party to reorganize the state in such a way that that party can win votes and, in turn, future elections. We say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay As the population of the United States grew, some individuals determined that it was in the interests of parties to do what is now called Gerrymandering, the redistricting of a state in a partisan manner so that one party can have the check. While the name Gerrymandering may seem coincidental, it was named after Elbridge Gerry, governor of Massachusetts in 1812. In 1812, Elbridge Gerry was in control of redistricting Massachusetts. Gerry reorganized the counties surrounding Boston in such a way as to create a bizarre form of South Essex, which in turn allowed the Democratic-Republican candidates to maintain power over the Federalists. Some Federalist writers were quick to call his new creation a monster, some even calling it what appeared to be a salamander. Quick to pen, these Federalists deemed the new creature a Gerrymander, a combination of the governor's last name and the word salamander. Although gerrymandering appears to be just a partisan way to gain votes, many officials have also used it for social gain. and racial power. It is human nature to group with those who are similar to them, and in addition to socioeconomic pressure, ethnicities and races tend to coexist. This has made it very easy for some individuals to disadvantage minorities. But in the Voting Rights Act of 1960, it became law that lawmakers could not use the redistricting power to suppress black voters. An example of this was Shaw v. Reno in 1993, when a North Carolina legislator placed all cities in a single district, thus concentrating all urban and minority voters in a single district and minimizing their votes. This is a difficult question when you ask a political scientist, since it is important to redistrict so that minorities are represented by those who have similar experiences to them, and at the same time make sure that districts do not suppress them. This is why, when redistricting, we cannot create square counties or states. By creating arbitrary lines, minority voices are silenced and thus leads to the tyranny of the majority. A key example of this is below. While the district appears to be Gerrymander, which generally has a bad connotation,instead, green represents two Latino communities and the space between them is a heavily African-American community. If it were possible to reorganize a country so that every county and district were perfect squares, without social or political resistance, I believe it would have been done already. However, people don't live in boxes, and communities in this country are filled with diverse groups of people and geographic locations. Before that is possibleTo determine what is wrong with our current system, as well as propose new ways to reorganize our country, we must first understand how legislatures currently divide communities. As I stated before, it is illegal for Gerrymander to suppress racial groups. However, it is not illegal to Gerrymander to suppress voters of opposing parties. To benefit their own party, legislatures either break up or package themselves. With the break, the minority group expands so that it has no representative. By packing their bags, legislatures put all political minorities into a compact district, and in exchange give them as few representatives as possible. A key example of packaging was when Michigan was Gerrymandered in 2010. Even though the vote share of Democrats and Republicans was roughly the same over the four-year period, due to redistricting Democrats were condensed into districts, giving Republicans power in elections. To create a fair system, you need to allow representatives to fairly represent every individual in your state. For example, if a state has a population that is 40% blue and 60% red, the representatives should be 40% blue and 60% red. To create an even more just system it is necessary to also include racial, cultural and economic representatives. Observing the problems with the republic, many mathematicians turned to geometry and graph theory to determine appropriate ways to mathematically fix the system. Although several solutions are presented, one that has the merit of demonstrating the existence of a better mathematical method is the graph partitioning method. To understand how to perform graphical partitioning, we need to understand the different vocabulary and variables. While we will use vertices to partition the graph, these vertices, v, will represent groups of census blocks. Census block groups are one way the government divides the country into smaller groups. These census block groups are small communities, and the districts are made up of block groups, which are made up of census block groups. To understand how to create equally weighted groups, we need to combine the Census Block groups and connect them into graphs, G. Each vertex will be assigned a specific rank or weight determined by how many live in the area. We will connect these vertices together through the edges. (Doyle, 42) Census block groups are the smallest political group in an area, and therefore census block groups are typically one party. This is why for each vertex we can denote blue or red, which represents Democrat or Republican. To explain how to complete this process, I'll go over a small area. Once we achieve this, we will be able to demonstrate it, through computer programs, on a national scale. Given an area, drawn in figure 4, due to the distribution of the population, the government has deemed it to be composed of 7 census blocks. We are given the task of changing this map into 2 districts. The block shown is split 50% Democrat and 50% Republican, meaning we must then divide the census blocks by the same percentage to have an even split. 'For it to be moresimple, a coarsening of this graph has already been performed. Originally each individual would be represented by a vertex, which would then be transformed into this weighted graph. Although, in real maps, there will be a fair number of people living in each census block, for our explanation we will give each census block a weight between 1 and 7, each census block will have the weight of its own number . This map can then be transformed into a graph. Since in our original graph there is only one edge between each different cell block and we are ignoring the weight of the original graph, the weight of each edge is therefore 1. To get the minimum amount of edge cutting, we need to find the maximum pairing. (Soberon) In our graph above, we can find matches with 1 & 2, 3 & 4, and 5 & 6, leaving 7, our most weighted vertex, out of the match. By completing this, we can then create a minimum number of Democratic and Republican groupings. By adding the weights of the new leaders together, we can then look for better ways to divide this section into Republican and Democratic districts. If we denote 1 & 2 and 5 & 6 as a Republican district, and 3 & 4 and 7 as a Democratic district, as 1 + 2 + 5 + 6 = 3 + 4 + 7, then we can create two split districts. Next, we can simplify the graph and return to our original graph, now with the red and blue census block groups. The red lines are edges that connect as colored vertices. However, when we create two districts, there is no way to connect them to create a contiguous district. To make sure they are continuous, we can do something called local refinement. To achieve local refinement, we need to calculate the size of the edge cut, which is the “sum of the edge weights in an edge cut”. To maintain the relationship we must also maintain the weight of the districts. We can do this by swapping 3 and 4 with 1 and 6. Now, while red has 4 census block groups and blue has three, they have the same weight and therefore it is a fair system. While this method may seem to work perfectly in theory, it actually has many flaws. At the beginning of this article I introduced the delicate balance between racial representation and racial oppression when it comes to redistricting. While there are ways to create weights for block groups, it is not foolproof and many minorities, particularly in pockets of the Midwest, will be spread across majority-white communities. There are ideal ways to solve Gerrymandering problems without the need for computer algorithms. Graphical partitioning methods simply show how by dividing counties into sections, we can create fair political lines. If you wanted to change the percentage of colors, or divide the weights to represent race or economic stature rather than party and density, then you could do that. However, it would be very difficult, even with computers, to create a system with weighted cities that include all the criteria we need to create a fair system. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay While the graph partitioning method is an interesting mathematical interpretation on how to solve our Gerrymandering problem, it is not feasible. A simple answer to our Gerrymandering problem would be to look at what some states, like California, are already attempting; Instead of letting partisan legislatures create boundaries, they are turning to nonpartisan, bipartisan groups to divide the state. Yes, it is impossible to create a bipartisan map. Even mathematics, which is the least partisan method, still has flaws in the,. 1993.