The History of Apportionment

Narins, Josh josh.narins at
Thu Mar 14 08:54:26 PST 2002

Actually, I wrote entirely incorrectly.
The method selected was the Method of Equal Proportions.
The Method of Harmonic Mean was not selected.

Whoops :)

-----Original Message-----
From: DEMOREP1 at [mailto:DEMOREP1 at]
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 1:13 AM
To: election-methods-list at
Subject: RE: The History of Apportionment

josh.narins wrote in part-

In 1941, the NAS got back to Congress with five possible solutions. Congress

didn't take long in deciding that the "Method of the Harmonic Mean" was

fairest (2), and we've been using that method ever since.
D- the MHM is also called the Method of Equal Proportions.

MHM/ MEP tries to get the Population/Seat ratios the same for each State.

Example  2 States A and B

PA/SA  versus PB/SB

The A or B State gets the next seat so at to get the

PA/SA /  PB/SB  ratio closer to 1 (after each State gets the 1 seat minimum)

The remedy to get exact representation is proxy p.r.--

each winner (in multi-member districts) has a voting power in the
body equal to the number of final votes he/she receives.

This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.  Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such.  All information is subject to change without notice.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list