In article <15u0349chvm94ope0c8055ifvsmdcnrl2s@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>hrubin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Herman Rubin) wrote:
>>In article <nejo24tckslc5t5t0kpo8re1m78f0drlnv@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>Pubkeybreaker <pubkeybreaker@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
..............
>>It was clearly the expectation of
>>those who wrote the Constitution that the representatives
>>of the individual districts would represent the interests
>>of the people in the district;
>It is NOT clearly so. Indeed there is no mention of congressional
>districts in the Constitution, and states could in theory have all
>congresscritters elected at-large.
I am not sure if there is or is not, but there is
legislation which requires districts of roughly
equal population. One proposal to do this for
the members of the Michigan State Senate when
their constitution was being revised was to seat
each candidate who got more than 25% of the vote
in a district to have a vote on legislation equal
to the number of votes he got. This would get
around any problem of equality of population in
districts; it was argued that someone could
represent an urban district, such as Detroit
with its then 1.5 million people, but that the
Upper Peninsula would need at least one
representative because of its size. This would
also increase the pressure to vote even if it
is known in advance which party would get the
most votes.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
|
