Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
When using the Hare quota, this rule is called Hamilton's method, and is the third-most common apportionment rule worldwide (after Jefferson's method and Webster's method). [1] Despite their intuitive definition, quota methods are generally disfavored by social choice theorists as a result of apportionment paradoxes.
They included the mode of election of the president, including final recommendations for the electors, a group of people apportioned among the states in the same numbers as their representatives in Congress (the formula for which had been resolved in lengthy debates resulting in the Connecticut Compromise and Three-Fifths Compromise), but ...
The Knesset (Israel's unicameral legislature), are elected by party-list representation with apportionment by the D'Hondt method. [ a ] Had the Huntington–Hill method, rather than the D'Hondt method, been used to apportion seats following the elections to the 20th Knesset , held in 2015, the 120 seats in the 20th Knesset would have been ...
The basis for apportionment may be out of date. For example, in the United States, apportionment follows the decennial census. The states conducted the 2010 elections with districts apportioned according to the 2000 Census. The lack of accuracy does not justify the present cost and perceived intrusion of a new census before each biennial election.
The apportionment method currently used is the method of equal proportions, which minimizes the percentage differences in the number of people per representative among the different states. [43] The resulting apportionment is optimal in the sense that any additional transfer of a seat from one state to another would result in larger percentage ...
The Balinski–Young theorem proved in 1980 that if an apportionment method satisfies the quota rule, it must fail to satisfy some apportionment paradox. [3] For instance, although largest remainder method satisfies the quota rule, it violates the Alabama paradox and the population paradox. The theorem itself is broken up into several different ...
The seat bias of an apportionment is the tendency of an apportionment method to systematically favor either large or small parties. Jefferson's method and Droop's method are heavily biased in favor of large states; Adams' method is biased in favor of small states; and the Webster and Huntington–Hill methods are effectively unbiased toward ...
In order to make the total number of legislators come out equal to the target number, the divisor is adjusted to make the sum of allocated seats after being rounded give the required total. One way to determine the correct value of the divisor would be to start with a very large divisor, so that no seats are allocated after rounding.