(Dis-)proportional representation II


I was just wondering below whether, given that the number of people represented by Democratic and Republican is so different in the US Senate, small irregularities in apportionment or districting also resulted in a bias in the House.

The short answer is: It doesn't. I'm glad I checked, but there's no big surprise here.

On average, Democrats in the House represent 645,032 people each, whereas Republicans represent 646,308 people each, a difference of only 0.2%. (By comparison, the difference in the Senate, where Democrats represent far more citizens per seat, is a hundred times bigger at a whopping 20%)

If you want, you can check my math. My sources were here (for the district population numbers) and here (for the breakdown of seats by party).The Excel file with the calculation is here: congress.xls

It's kind of a relief that the population-proportional house of Congress does, in fact, end up being population-proportional by party.

This takes nothing away from what a bummer it is that Democratic constituencies are so relatively disfranchised in the Senate.

(As an aside: What's up with Montana and Wyoming? In Montana, a population of 902,195 gets them a single Representative, whereas fewer than half as many in Wyoming get a seat. Shouldn't Montana get two? I must say I'm surprised.)

Posted: Fri - April 1, 2005 at 04:33 PM   | Category:     |   |   | |


©
eXTReMe Tracker