Standardizing Representation for Equality with a Population Seat Index
Abstract
Proportional representation (PR) has long been believed the ideal system for the equality of individuals in apportioning the seats of a legislature body to subgroups. We observe that PR implicitly assumes the (standard) number of representatives is proportional to the population, a situation no longer observed since 1820s. To address this issue, we suggest to formulate the apportionment problem in a broader context by explicitly specifying a standard function such that is the standard, possibly fractional number of representatives for population , where PR assumes . For this generalized apportionment problem, we give a population seat index (PSI) for quantifying the contribution of an individual in assigning seats to a population , where is the inverse of . With the PSI, we derive apportioning schemes with absolute and relative individual equality. Particularly, for seats, populations , and a standard function with constants , the ideal, possibly fractional number of seats for subgroup is , not calculated by PR which works only for , . Finally, since real-world observations indicate a standard function with , we conclude that PR represents individuals in less populous subgroups less than individuals in more populous subgroups.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2212.14790,
title = {Standardizing Representation for Equality with a Population Seat Index},
author = {Liang Zhao and Akiko Tanimoto and Wenruo Lyu},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.14790},
year = {2023}
}
Comments
It has 12 pages, 4 figures, and 2 tables. The aim of this article is to point out a bias in the current indicator for estimating the contribution (weight) of individuals in assigning seats of a legislature (e.g., a congress) to sub-groups (states, etc) and provide a novel theory that has with no such bias