The issue of congressional apportionment has been hotly debated since the creation of the United States. Under the Articles of Confederation, our federal legislature was unicameral and apportioned representation equal between the states, but not to their population. Each state was represented by two to seven delegates, but each state only had one vote. The U.S. Constitution fixed that problem, however. The Connecticut Compromise created a bicameral legislature where the upper house would grant two votes per state and the lower house would be based on population. Then a question arose: should slaves count towards a state’s population worthy of representation? After all, slaves could not vote or make their voices heard in hardly any other way, so many Northerners found it unfair that the Southern states would gain votes in the House from people that they oppressed. On the other hand, if the slaves were not included in the population, the slaves (although treated unequally regardless) would be vastly underrepresented. This dispute led to the Three-Fifths Compromise which counted three out of every five slaves towards a state’s population.

Historically there has always been a disparity on the number of people one Representative represents. In 1860, Delaware, Florida, and Oregon had one representative each. Oregon’s population was the smallest at 52,465, and Florida’s was the largest at 140,424. This meant that the Representative from Florida represented almost 88,000 more people or 2.68 times the amount of people than the Representative from Oregon. In 1960, six states were represented by one Representative (Alaska, Hawaii, Nevada, Wyoming, Delaware, and Vermont.) Of these states, Hawaii had the highest population (632,772) and Alaska had the lowest (226,167). Interestingly, Hawaii had less representation in the House than two states whose populations were less than its. This difference in representation between Alaska and Hawaii equaled 406,605, and the Representative from Hawaii was representing 2.8 times more people than the Representative from Alaska. Finally, in 2018, seven states are represented by one Representative (Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Delaware, and Vermont). Montana had the highest population (1,050,493) and Wyoming has the lowest population (579,315). This is a difference of 471,178 meaning that the Representative from Montana represents 1.81 times the people that the Representative from Wyoming does.

This means that the populations, in proportion to one another, are more similar than they were historically. So, the fact that the Representative from Montana represents more people is not that big of a deal. The main problem is that there are over 600,000 citizens living in Washington D.C. that are not represented at all. I believe the best way for them to be represented is to receive one Representative in the House. This is a good compromise, because they deserve representation, but do not deserve the same standing as other states. Washington D.C. does not deserve two Senators unless they are granted statehood. In this way, they will have a voice, but it will be slightly smaller than those of actual states who are of a similar size.

[The Home Page will show a running blog of your recent posts, which are categorized and show on that category’s page. Please delete this post or edit with your own information.]