Feature
Reimagining Democracy 2026 Summer Reading List
Tova Wang, director of research projects in democratic practice at the Ash Center, shares her top picks for summer reads focused on making democracy more resilient, responsive, and inclusive.
Media Release
New research outlines novel partisan solution to partisan gerrymandering
In a new paper in Political Analysis, Ben Schneer, Assistant Professor of Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School, alongside co-authors Maxwell Palmer, Associate Professor, Boston University; and Kevin DeLuca, Assistant Professor, Yale University; present a new method for drawing legislative boundaries, the Define–Combine Procedure.
Cambridge, MA – In a new paper in Political Analysis, Ben Schneer, Assistant Professor of Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School, alongside co-authors Maxwell Palmer, Associate Professor, Boston University; and Kevin DeLuca, Assistant Professor, Yale University; present a new method for drawing legislative boundaries, the Define–Combine Procedure. Though redistricting reformers have proposed numerous solutions to the challenge of partisan gerrymandering, they all require either bipartisan consensus — or for politicians to accept the legitimacy of a neutral arbiter, such as an independent redistricting commission or judge.
Schneer and his co-authors introduce the Define-Combine Procedure (DCP) as a tool for crafting redistricting plans that reduce partisan gerrymandering without requiring bipartisan agreement or even a neutral third party. DCP works in two parts:
- One party defines a map of equal-population contiguous districts.
- The second party combines pairs of contiguous districts to create the final map.
The authors ran thousands of simulations and argue that not only is DCP mathematically feasible and effective, but politically possible. “This framework offers parties the autonomy to respect communities of interest, geographic boundaries, and other political concerns — that is, to internalize the wide range of factors that play important roles in decisions about redistricting — while nonetheless tempering the partisan biases that emerge during redistricting,” they write.
“By involving both parties but setting them in opposition to each other, rather than requiring bipartisan cooperation or independent third-party mediators, DCP offers a partisan solution to the extraordinarily partisan process that is redistricting.”
More resources, including a DCP simulator, are available at definecombine.com.
About the Authors
Benjamin Schneer is an Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His research is in American politics and focuses primarily on political representation: how citizens express their preferences, how government responds to them, and what may shape and distort these processes. His most recent papers have studied just how much of an effect the media has on the national political conversation, the role that petitioning has played in American political development, and the returns to elected office based on future earnings from corporate board service and lobbying.
Maxwell Palmer is an Associate Professor in Boston University’s Department of Political Science, a Civic Tech Fellow in the Faculty of Computing & Data Sciences, and a Faculty Fellow at the Initiative on Cities. He joined the Department and Boston University in 2014, after receiving his Ph.D. in Political Science at Harvard University. He studies study American political institutions, including Congress, electoral institutions, and local political institutions, with a particularly focus on how institutional arrangements and rules impact representation and policy outcomes. Palmer also works as a consultant and expert witness on questions about voting rights, redistricting, and representation.
Kevin DeLuca is an Assistant Professor of Political Science, Resident Fellow at the Institution for Social and Policy Studies (ISPS), and Faculty Affiliate at the Center for the Study of American Politics (CSAP). His research interests include political institutions and the political economy of media, with a focus on election laws and the role of local newspapers in politics.
About the Ash Center
The Mission of the Roy and Lila Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation at Harvard Kennedy School is to develop ideas and foster practices for equal and inclusive, multi-racial and multi-ethnic democracy and self-government.
Contact
Daniel Harsha, Director of Communications and Strategic Initiatives, Daniel_Harsha@hks.harvard.edu
Sarah Grucza, Assistant Director of Communications, Sarah_Grucza@hks.harvard.edu
Related Resources
Podcast
Terms of Engagement – The Battle for the Democratic Party
What does the rise of Democratic Socialists and other progessives mean for the future of American politics? Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a conservative commentator, joins Terms of Engagement hosts Archon Fung and Stephen Richer to discuss.
Podcast
Terms of Engagement – An Optimistic Take on AI and Democracy
Public interest technologist Bruce Schneier joins Terms of Engagement hosts Archon Fung and Stephen Richer to discuss circumstances under which AI systems could defy doom-and-gloom scenarios and actually enhance democracy and civic engagement.
Feature
Reimagining Democracy 2026 Summer Reading List
Tova Wang, director of research projects in democratic practice at the Ash Center, shares her top picks for summer reads focused on making democracy more resilient, responsive, and inclusive.
Commentary
Allen Lab Fellow Spotlight: City Charters Are Deliberative Democracy’s Friends
Allen Lab Fellow Tyler Fisher examines the untapped potential of city charters as a vehicle for deliberative democracy, arguing that advocates should work to embed tools like citizen assemblies, participatory budgeting, and town meetings directly into the governing architecture of cities, institutionalizing deliberative democracy one municipality at a time.
Commentary
Work in the Age of AI: Reflections from After Neoliberalism
Allen Lab member Charlie Covit reflects on the After Neoliberalism conference and examines the intersection of artificial intelligence and the future of work, arguing that AI forces a democratic reckoning with the meaning of labor itself and that an economy which generates abundance while stripping citizens of purpose and dignity undermines the very foundation of democratic life.