Randomized Algorithms for Determining the Majority on Graphs

Every node of an undirected connected graph is colored white or black. Adjacent nodes can be compared and the outcome of each comparison is either 0 (same color) or 1 (different colors). The aim is to discover a node of the majority color, or to conclude that there is the same number of black and white nodes. We consider randomized algorithms for this task and establish upper and lower bounds on their expected running time. Our main contribution are lower bounds showing that some simple and natural algorithms for this problem cannot be improved in general

The Parliament of the Experts

In the administrative state, how should expert opinions be aggregated and used? If a panel of experts is unanimous on a question of fact, causation, or prediction, can an administrative agency rationally disagree, and on what grounds? If experts are split into a majority view and a minority view, must the agency follow the majority? Should reviewing courts limit agency discretion to select among the conflicting views of experts, or to depart from expert consensus? I argue that voting by expert panels is likely, on average, to be epistemically superior to the substantive judgment of agency heads, in determining questions of fact, causation, or prediction. Nose counting of expert panels should generally be an acceptable basis for decision under the arbitrary and capricious or substantial evidence tests. Moreover, agencies should be obliged to follow the (super)majority view of an expert panel, even if the agency\u27s own judgment is to the contrary, unless the agency can give an epistemically valid second-order reason for rejecting the panel majority\u27s view

Constitutional Law: Supreme Court Delineates the Relationship Between the Fourth and Fifth Amendments

In Schmerber v. California the Supreme Court reaffirmed the admissibility of blood test evidence procured without consent of the accused. Rejecting petitioner\u27s fourth and fifth amendment claims, the Court utilized a refined definition of the privilege against self-incrimination in determining the reasonableness of intracorporeal search and seizure. Moreover, the approach taken by the majority arguably presages the demise of the mere evidence rule

Democracy and the European Constitution: Majority Voting and Small Member States

The purpose of this article is to shed light on the relation between large and small member states with regard to the majority principle. Since Maastricht at the latest the institutional discussion centers around the question of how to devise a decision system which pays equal attention to the interests of small and large states in the European Union. This article challenges several underlying assumptions: that size is an important factor determining the political clout of a member state; the existence of ‘natural’ interest divergences and the competitive nature of the European politiy. Finally, it questions the intrinsic relation between majority voting and democracy.democracy; majority voting; European Convention; legitimacy; political science

An Analysis of the Majority Report “Responsible Parenthood” and its Recommendations on Abortion, Sterilization and Contraception

This paper will focus on the majority report (titled “Responsible Parenthood”) of the 1966 Papal Birth Control Commission and its recommendations on abortion, sterilization, and contraception.(1) The analysis is made with the hindsight and perspective of thirty-seven years of scientific data on fertility, family planning, and family life. The analysis presented here does not concern the whole document but rather focuses on what are called the “objective criteria” that were provided in the document to help married couples make decisions on the use of contraception. While acknowledging the intellectual abilities and expertise of those who wrote the majority report, the analysis will show that the commission was “near-sighted” in its recommendation for change in the Church’s teaching on contraception. This paper will argue that the commission responsible for writing the majority report was wrong on a number of basic issues. Oddly enough, had Catholic followed the criteria as laid out in the majority report, there would be fewer abortions and sterilizations today among Catholics. Furthermore, in addition to the flawed criteria provided by the Commission, the world-wide dissent with the Church and the shift to a personal or intuitive judgment in determining what is right or wrong had the effect of promoting contraception, abortion and sterilization rather than preventing these immoral practices

The Phillips Machine (MONIAC)

The Phillips Machine, or Monetary National Income Analogue Computer (MONIAC), is a hydraulic representation of cash flow within the UK economy in the early 20th century. It represents the circular flow of income (New Zealand Institute of Economic Research, 2015), shown by the economic equation Aggregate Demand = Consumer Expenditure + Investment + Government Spending + (Exports – Imports), or Y = C + I + G + (X – M), which is an important equation in determining the national output of an economy (Pettinger, 2008). Though no longer in use, of the 14 that were built, the majority were originally restricted to military and government use owing to their effectiveness in determining economic policy. This paper describes an implementation of an emulation of this machine that satisfies, or mostly satisfies, almost all of the requirements specified in the ISO/IEC 25010 software quality assurance standard and would be suitable for deployment to support A-Level Economics teaching. With further work it would also become suitable as part of a museum display of a Phillips Machine

Separation of Powers or Ideology? What Determines the Tax Level? Theory and Evidence from the US States.

We find the surprising result that the tax level is negatively correlated with the size of the Democratic majority in the interval in which the Democrats hold between 50 and 66% of the seats in the state Legislatures. This negative relationship suggests the failure of a simple ideological model that had found some support in the literature, that the main determinant of the tax level is the extent of partisan control over the Legislature. We compare this model with an alternative: a separation-of-powers model in which ideology plays no role in determining the tax level. The driving force of our model is the overlap between the supporters of the Governor and the supporters of the legislative majority. The tax level at first rises and then decreases as the size of the ruling majority increases above 50% of the seats, whether the legislative majority is of the same party as the Governor or from the opposition. This non-monotonic relationship is observed in the data and explained by our model.Separation of powers, divided government, line-item veto, tax level, semiparametric.

A Dollar for Your Thoughts: Determining Whether Nominal Damages Prevent an Otherwise Moot Case from Being an Advisory Opinion

This Note examines whether nominal damages should sustain an otherwise moot constitutional claim. A majority of circuit courts have held that a lone claim for nominal damages is sufficient. A minority of circuit courts have determined that nominal damages are insufficient because there is no practical effect in determining such a case. The courts in the minority analogize nominal damages to declaratory judgments and justify their rulings on the basis of judicial economy. This Note proposes that the minority rule is impermissible under current precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court. However, this Note also proposes that the majority rule be adjusted slightly to address the concerns and criticisms of the minority rule. This Note argues that courts should scrutinize the lone claim for nominal damages and require that plaintiffs allege a specific incident of constitutional deprivation to ensure that there is an ongoing case and controversy. Finally, this Note suggests that the Supreme Court provide more guidance to federal courts on the doctrine of mootness

Determinants of Agricultural Protection in an International Perspective: The Role of Political Institutions

Abstract—This paper studies the role of political institutions in determining the political success of agriculture in avoiding taxation or attracting government transfers in developing and industrialized countries, respectively. The model is based on a probabilistic voting environment, where in industrialized countries rural districts are less ideologically committed than urban districts, while in developing countries urban districts are less ideologically committed than rural districts. As a consequence, in industrialized (developing) countries rural (urban) districts are pivotal in determining the coalition that obtains a majority, whereas urban (rural) districts are pivotal within the majority itself. In bargaining at the legislature, this generates a conflict between the government, who will tend to favor rural (urban) districts, and its parliamentary majority, that will be dominated by urban (rural) concerns. As district size grows and the electoral system converges to a pure proportional system, both of these biases are attenuated. Overall, an opposite nonlinear relationship between district size and agricultural subsidies on the one hand and district size and taxation on the other hand follows, i.e. in developing countries taxation of agriculture first increases and then decreases with district magnitude, while in industrialized countries agricultural subsidization first increases and then decreases with district magnitude. Moreover, the impact of district magnitude on the level of agricultural subsidization is attenuated in presidential when compared to parliamentary systems, while the level of agricultural taxation is amplified in presidential systems. Empirical results from cross-country analysis including 37 countries over 20 years mainly support our theory.Political Institutions, Agricultural Protection, Probabilistic Voting Model, International Relations/Trade,