Population monotonicity: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
Dr. Edmonds (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
'''Population monotonicity''' is a feature of electoral systems. It is often stated as a criterion for [[
The
{{Definition| If the number of voters increases then the party which the new voter endorsed cannot lose a seat.}}
By extension, the
The '''population paradox''' is a counter-intuitive result of some procedures for apportionment. When two states have populations increasing at different rates, a small state with rapid growth can lose a legislative seat to a big state with slower growth.
Some of the earlier Congressional apportionment methods, such as the [[Hamilton method]], could exhibit the population paradox. In 1900, Virginia lost a seat to Maine, even though Virginia's population was growing more rapidly. However,
==See also==
|