[EM] Sainte-Lague, part 3

[Joseph Malkevitch]

Dear Elections Methods,

The Alabama Paradox involves the reality that a state can get fewer  
seats in a parliament with a larger size. This can happen using the  
Largest Remainder Method.

There are various forms of axioms that can be assumed about how a  
good apportionment method should behave with respect to population  
changes.

For some examples of what can happen, see:

http://www.fiu.edu/~cvaug001/apportionment/paradoxexamples.htm
http://www.fiu.edu/~cvaug001/apportionment/moreparadoxexamples.htm

Regards,

Joe



On Dec 8, 2006, at 12:56 AM, Chris Benham wrote:

>
>
> MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
>
>> The very first use of the Presidential Veto was when George  
>> Washington
>> vetoed a bill to apportion the house by LR/Hamilton. We used
>> d'Hondt/Jefferson for a while. There was later another bill to enact
>> LR/Hamilton. It passed and wasn't vetored, and LR/Hamilton was  
>> used for a
>> while--till someone pointed out the bizarre paradoxes that it's  
>> subject to:
>> Some people move from another state to your state, causing your  
>> state to
>> lose a seat.
>>
> Mike,
> Can you (or anyone) explain or give a demonstration of  how this
> LR/Hamilton apportionment method
> could do that?
>
>
> Chris  Benham
> ----
> election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for  
> list info


------------------------------------------------
Joseph Malkevitch
Department of Mathematics
York College (CUNY)
Jamaica, New York 11451

Phone: 718-262-2551 (Voicemail available)

My new email is:

malkevitch at york.cuny.edu

web page:

http://www.york.cuny.edu/~malk



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20061208/b17e87fd/attachment-0003.htm>