[EM] small states really underrepresented? (Banzhaf myth)

[Warren Smith]

Forest Simmons resurrected a classic myth that small states have
less voting power (even under Adams apportionment).

I dispute that.

It is true in the sense that Joe Voter in a small state has less voting power
when filtered into the Fedral House using Banzhaf power at both stages of the filter.


However, that is all assuming  everybody votes randomly.
If you view the states as bloc votes, then the small states have
MORE power than the big ones and in fact will win every such battle.


The question is, which model is more correct?

when it comes to big vs small issues, the votes generally
ARE bloc.

Also, history shows the small states have more power and consequently
get more federal money.  There is a net outflow of money from
large states to the feds, but a net inflow of money from the feds
into small states.   What matters for that is what I might call "pork power."
That is, games are played of the form "give me your vote and I'll
pay you off with some pork."  The small states have more representatives
per person, consequently they get more pork per person at the expense
of the big states.

The proof is in the pudding, not in eggheaded power-definitions.


This same error was made in a paper by Hemaspaandra & Hemaspandra on
apportionment and other issues, viewed by them as computational complexity.
Long story short, I believe their paper was totally wrongheaded.

It in fact made a negative contribution.

Warren D Smith
http://rangevoting.org