AJPS — 2026-08-10
Original Durable majority gerrymanders: Where partisan gerrymandering can displace democracy
Maxwell Palmer, Benjamin Schneer
Abstract
Abstract We develop the concept of, and estimation tools for, durable majority gerrymanders : electoral district maps drawn to reduce an opposing political party's probability of winning a majority in a legislative chamber. Directly interpretable, forward‐looking, and motivated by the democratic principle that a party in power should have some chance of losing it, this measure provides new insights into the role of redistricting in state legislative elections. We show that, when map drawers are unconstrained, the ability to create durable majorities is so widespread that at least one party in every state can draw a map where a majority of legislative districts withstand almost any likely future electoral swing. Enacted maps are less durable due to a combination of underlying geography, voter partisanship, and state‐level guidelines. This paper provides the theoretical framework and empirical tools to understand which gerrymandered maps enable state‐level majorities to emerge and to endure.
PA — 2026-03-09
Original Possibilities for Social Equity Budgeting: Critical Insights From Bentham?
Laurence Ferry, Jim Haslam, Henry Midgley
Abstract
ABSTRACT Considering prior ways of seeing and practical mobilisations of Social Equity Budgeting (SEB), we suggest that prior conceptualisation, research and practice can be advanced by reflecting on insights from the philosophical and political literature on equity and justice. Here, we pursue such an approach and specifically contribute by considering how the writings of the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) provide critical insights informing possibilities for SEB. Our critical historical perspective, focused on the history of ideas in context, helps reinforce dimensions of today's prescriptive envisioning of SEB and indicate new insights and emphases in this regard around democracy and transparency (or publicity, to use Bentham's term). We here analyze progressive dimensions and possibilities in Bentham but also acknowledge and articulate the need to balance this with appreciation of critique of Bentham and more negative possibilities. Both dimensions have policy implications. Our analysis is facilitated by the notable (relatively) recent work of the Bentham Project at University College London (UCL) in seeking to publish the many previously unpublished writings of Bentham held in the UCL archive. Here, Gallhofer and Haslam's (2003) text, informed in part by detailed archival research into Bentham's then unpublished handwritten manuscripts, was a key starting point.