IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v25y1931i04p961-965_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methods of Apportionment in Congress

Author

Listed:
  • Huntington, Edward V.

Abstract

Introduction. The apportionment for this decade has now been made by Congress, and a bill has been passed which will automatically provide for reapportionment in all subsequent decades. Under this law, the size of the House will remain 435, and the method of computation will remain the method of major fractions as used in 1911 unless Congress takes the initiative in making a change. It may, however, be a matter of interest to put on record a brief description of the principal “methods” which were under discussion in the recent congressional debates. No knowledge of mathematics is required in order to understand the purpose and result of each of these methods.The constitutional requirement. The constitutional requirement reads as follows: “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed; …. but each state shall have at least one representative.” Hence, in a theoretically perfect apportionment, the ratio of representation in any state would be exactly equal to the ratio of representation in every other state. In practice, however, perfect equality cannot be secured, on account of fractions. Hence, in the practical problem of apportioning any given number of representatives among the several states, the only way in which the constitutional requirement can be met is by making the unavoidable inequalities between the states as small as possible.

Suggested Citation

  • Huntington, Edward V., 1931. "Methods of Apportionment in Congress," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 961-965, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:25:y:1931:i:04:p:961-965_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400114819/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jarosław Flis & Wojciech Słomczyński & Dariusz Stolicki, 2020. "Pot and ladle: a formula for estimating the distribution of seats under the Jefferson–D’Hondt method," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 201-227, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:25:y:1931:i:04:p:961-965_11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.