Election Data Services here analyzes which states are likely to gain or lose seats in the U.S. House, following the 2020 census. Of course these are only estimates. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.
Election Data Services here analyzes which states are likely to gain or lose seats in the U.S. House, following the 2020 census. Of course these are only estimates. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.
https://www.census.gov/topics/public-sector/congressional-apportionment.html
Gerrymander process — start with obsolete population estimates.
https://www.census.gov/topics/public-sector/congressional-apportionment/about/computing.html
Use the MEP on the obsolete pop. ests. — to get the number of gerrymander hacks per State.
Add old voting stats — by precincts = latest minority rule gerrymanders.
—
PR and AppV
https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/maps/reference.html
put the gerrymanders on maps
God Demo Rep, you seriously are the dumbest person on the planet. You’re a complete fucking waste of oxygen.
Dealing with the math morons/juveniles on this list is good practice/exercise for dealing with the killers/tyrants in the domestic Donkey/Elephant and foreign regimes — in the CRISIS yet to come.
PR and AppV
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_apportionment
for NON-morons and juveniles.
It would be cool if California lost a seat since it would illustrate a paradox with the apportionment algorithm; A state increasing its population share, while reducing its representation share.
Congress should apportion representatives to the nearest 1/5 of a representative. A state with 11.6 representatives would elect 12 representatives for 3 elections during a decade, and 11 representatives for two elections.
JR – Sorry — the gerrymander Congress can NOT violate 14th Amdt, Sec. 2 for any 2 year USA Rep cycle.
SCOTUS had a case about the MEP math — ? Franklin v Secretary of Commerce ?
@DR,
“Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers”
The apportionment would be in accord with their respective numbers.
‘Franklin v Massachusetts’ (1992) concerned what were the respective numbers, not the apportionment itself.
Honestly, I don’t trust Montana to elect people I’d like, but it’s still cool to see they might finally get two seats in the U.S. House.
United States Dep’t of Commerce v. Montana (91-860), 503 U.S. 442 (1992)
has the MEP math.
@DR,
In ‘United States Department of Commerce v Montana’ the SCOTUS deferred to the judgment of Congress in determining the apportionment. Neither the SCOTUS or Congress were apparently aware of this most excellent method of apportionment.
JR — email your math to the USA Congress gerrymander hacks
— esp. in the States that would lose Rep seats using your math.
Report back any response from the HACKS.
—
PR and AppV — NO census math — ACTUAL voters/votes.
History note —
the ONLY veto by Prez Washington was a bill for the 1792 apportionment of Reps after the 1790 Census —
ie machinations regarding seat fractions – ignore all, 0-0.5 use/ignore, 0.5-1 use/ignore
How accurate was such Census ??? – in the WILD frontier areas.
How were votes done and reported from early 1600s to *modern* times (esp. before telegraphs in 1840s) ???
Any early adding machines ???
MEP is based on Pop/S and Pop/(S+1) ratios —
later square root of S x (S+1) —
sqrt 1×2, 2×3, 3×4, etc.
With larger S, the sqrt of S x (S+1) nears S + 0.5
50 x 51 = 2550
50.5 x 50.5 = 2550.25
Any *direct* taxes based on such ACTUAL votes —
representation = taxation.
@DR,
Thomas Jefferson talked George Washington into the veto. His method favors large states, such a Virginia, in effect a Jeffersonmander. The Congress chose a divisor that would give more proportional results despite this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apportionment_Act_of_1792
One more amazing wiki.
@DR,
Direct taxes can be apportioned to the nearest dollar, or even penny.
the 2010 apportionment population was 308,745,538. If Congress were to levy a direct tax of $3,087,455.38, then a state would be apportioned a direct tax of $0.01 (one cent) per person.
@DR. I’d assumed you had read the actual debate.
http://www.chegg.com/homework-help/use-hamilton-s-method-apportionment-population-data-figure-6-chapter-6.2-problem-45e-solution-9781305464858-exc
Anyhow, if you work through the data you’ll see that Jefferson’s method with a carefully selected divisor of 33,000 yielding a House of 105 members produces the same result as Webster’s method with a target size of 105, with one exception. Virginia gets an extra seat, and Delaware loses one.
The SCOTUS morons have failed to detect that a *direct* tax is a tax on an asset
— ie on a level item — such as each human head.
Any 2 or more headed folks with high bio-tech stuff ???
Indirect taxes are on flows of goods and services – including money flows.
IE – the SCOTUS moron screwup produced the UN-needed 16th Amdt.
When Congress did levy a direct tax in 1798, New Hampshire was apportioned $77,705.36 (and 2 mills), there were proportional apportionment for the other 15 States.
The tax was collected on property (houses, land, and slaves). The tax rate for land was based on the total apportionment for the state minus the assessment on houses and land, divided by the total value of the land.
If New Hampshire can be apportioned $77,705.36 (and 2 mills) in direct taxes, there is no reason that it could not be apportioned 1.6 representatives, with 2 for three Congresses and 1 for two Congresses (118th through 122nd).
How about a postcard census every 2 years ??? — also noting 14 Amdt, Sec. 2.
The Census – Seats/fractions stuff is more late DARK AGE politics.
PR and AppV — in the 21st Century.
@DR, You can use PR with temporally variant representation.
Section 2 would be easier to apply if fractional representation were used. Imagine that Michigan didn’t let people over 75 vote, and that represented 5% of the adult citizen population excluding felons. Under Section 2, Michigan should lose 5% of 14 representatives. How can you reduce the representation by 0.7 representative. But with fractional representation it is trivial.
This idea that there should CDXXXV whole representatives is Dark Ages math. Fractions are rational, it is not like I am proposing the use of irrational or imaginary numbers or anything complex at all.
EXACT PR — Each legislator has a Voting Power equal to the direct and indirect votes that he/she gets.
NO census, no fractions stuff.
V = Votes
M = Members
Sample
M1 — VVVVV
M2 — VVVVVVV
M3 — VVV
Etc.
Spreadsheet child’s play.
IMO, there is one big issue with the census that hasn’t been mentioned: undocumented aliens. I have a suspicion that Trump is going to declare that illegals are not true residents and ought not be counted as such. How the census can determine whether anyone is undocumented or not remains to be seen, but by just saying so, Trump may frighten undocumented residents from participating in the census at all.
@Walt Ziobro
One way I can see Trump doing this is that since census takers are de-facto federal government employees/agents/whatever he could task them with the requirement to report anyone violating federal law (ie. immigration laws) something he can’t require of state employees.
@WZ,
Citizens of other countries who are visiting on census day aren’t supposed to be counted.
So-called illegal immigrants are INVADERS, armed or unarmed.
I-8-15: The Congress shall have power *** To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
I-10-3: No State shall, ****** engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
IV-4 The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; ***
—–
See the ROT and final destruction of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD due to centuries of those *invasions*.
Too many New Age MORONS to count.