  An important problem in computational social choice theory is the complexity
of undesirable behavior among agents, such as control, manipulation, and
bribery in election systems. These kinds of voting strategies are often
tempting at the individual level but disastrous for the agents as a whole.
Creating election systems where the determination of such strategies is
difficult is thus an important goal.
  An interesting set of elections is that of scoring protocols. Previous work
in this area has demonstrated the complexity of misuse in cases involving a
fixed number of candidates, and of specific election systems on unbounded
number of candidates such as Borda. In contrast, we take the first step in
generalizing the results of computational complexity of election misuse to
cases of infinitely many scoring protocols on an unbounded number of
candidates. Interesting families of systems include $k$-approval and $k$-veto
elections, in which voters distinguish $k$ candidates from the candidate set.
  Our main result is to partition the problems of these families based on their
complexity. We do so by showing they are polynomial-time computable, NP-hard,
or polynomial-time equivalent to another problem of interest. We also
demonstrate a surprising connection between manipulation in election systems
and some graph theory problems.
