Huntington-Hill method
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Huntington-Hill method of apportionment assigns seats by finding a modified divisor D such that each constituency's priority quotient (population divided by D), using the geometric mean of the lower and upper quota for the divisor, yields the correct number of seats that minimizes the percentage differences in the size of the congressional districts[1]. When envisioned as a proportional voting system, this is effectively a highest averages method in which the divisors are given by
, n being the number of seats a state is currently allocated in the apportionment process (the lower quota) and n+1 is the number of seats the state would have if it is assigned to this state (the upper quota).
The United States House of Representatives uses this method of apportionment to assign the number of representative seats to each state.
The method is credited to Edward Vermilye Huntington and Joseph Adna Hill.[2]
[edit] Example
Although the U.S. House of Representatives currently uses the Equal Proportionment Method, Congress has not always used it. In fact, George Washington used the presidential veto power for the very first time in order to block apportionment legislation less favorable to his home state of Virginia. Had Congress used the Equal Proportionment Method (with a divisor of 34,800) to apportion House seats according to state population following the 1790 census, the House of Representatives would have been apportioned as follows (for an historically accurate House size of 105 seats):
| State | Population | Quotas | Lower | Upper | G. Mean | Rnd. Dir. | Seats |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connecticut | 236,841 | 6.81 | 6 | 7 | 6.48 | up | 7 |
| Delaware | 55,540 | 1.60 | 1 | 2 | 1.41 | up | 2 |
| Georgia | 70,835 | 2.04 | 2 | 3 | 2.45 | down | 2 |
| Kentucky | 68,705 | 1.97 | 1 | 2 | 1.41 | up | 2 |
| Maryland | 278,514 | 8.00 | 8 | 9 | 8.49 | down | 8 |
| Massachusetts | 475,327 | 13.66 | 13 | 14 | 13.49 | up | 14 |
| New Hampshire | 141,822 | 4.08 | 4 | 5 | 4.47 | down | 4 |
| New Jersey | 179,570 | 5.16 | 5 | 6 | 5.48 | down | 5 |
| New York | 331,589 | 9.53 | 9 | 10 | 9.49 | up | 10 |
| North Carolina | 353,523 | 10.16 | 10 | 11 | 10.49 | down | 10 |
| Pennsylvania | 432,879 | 12.44 | 12 | 13 | 12.49 | down | 12 |
| Rhode Island | 68,446 | 1.97 | 1 | 2 | 1.41 | up | 2 |
| South Carolina | 206,236 | 5.93 | 5 | 6 | 5.48 | up | 6 |
| Vermont | 85,533 | 2.46 | 2 | 3 | 2.45 | up | 3 |
| Virginia | 630,560 | 18.12 | 18 | 19 | 18.49 | down | 18 |
- ^ "Congressional Apportionment". NationalAtlas.gov. http://www.nationalatlas.gov/articles/boundaries/a_conApport.html#six. Retrieved on 2009-02-14.
- ^ "The History of Apportionment in America". American Mathematical Society. http://www.ams.org/featurecolumn/archive/apportion2.html. Retrieved on 2009-02-15.
| This mathematics-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |

