• Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is because California just blows the curve. If California either didn’t exist or was chopped into a few pieces the numbers would look dramatically better. Likewise for merging the Dakotas or Montana and Wyoming on the other end.

    The method used to apportion the House is designed to minimize the average difference in Representatives/capita between states.

    But yeah, any system in which California exists and states like Alaska or Wyoming have any meaningful power at all is going to result in California being under represented per capita.

    This is functionally the same as someone in the EU complaining that Germany doesn’t have remotely enough power and Luxembourg and Malta have far too much, except that the EU parliament doesn’t have as broad power as Congress and you can leave the EU.

    • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      The method used to apportion the House is designed to minimize the average difference in Representatives/capita between states.

      That broke in 1929 when they capped the house.