Question

24 POINTS FOR QUICK HELP

Answer 1

Legislative apportionment, also called legislative delimitation, process by which representation is distributed among the constituencies of a representative assembly. This use of the term apportionment is limited almost exclusively to the United States. In most other countries, particularly the United Kingdom and the countries of the British Commonwealth, the term delimitation is used.
Apportionment can take relatively simple forms. For example, in the assembly of ancient Athens, each citizen represented himself. During later centuries, the courts and councils of kings and emperors comprised representatives of several classes, such as the nobility and the clergy, and of bodies such as guilds and centres of learning. With the growth of democracy, the extension of suffrage, and the rise of political parties, legislative apportionment became more complex. Apportionment had to be methodically and mathematically arranged to ensure that the distribution of legislative seats reflected the will of the electorate.
Although practice varies widely, there are five predominant types of legislative apportionment, each giving rise to a particular form of constituency:
1. Territorial apportionment: constituencies have specified boundaries, and ideally the number of voters in each of the constituencies is about equal. This is the most common form of apportionment.2. Apportionment among self-contained governing units (e.g., towns, counties, cities, states, etc.): the unit of local government acts as the constituency and is represented in higher legislative bodies.3. Apportionment among official bodies that act as constituencies: local or provincial bodies choose representatives (e.g., U.S. senators were chosen by state legislatures in most states before the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution).4. Apportionment among functional groupings of the population: the electorate is grouped according to social or economic characteristics, which results in divisions such as that between the nobility, clergy, and commoners of early English Parliaments or that between the occupational, industrial, professional, national, and other groupings used as the basis for apportionment in guild socialism.5. Apportionment among party interests: systems of proportional representation are designed to reflect as many facets of voter opinion as possible. Under the latter two systems, the group or party is regarded as the constituency.
SIMILAR TOPICSsuffrageinterest grouppolitical conventionconstituencyplurality systemreferendum and initiativeproportional representationplebisciterecall electionprimary electionDisparity in the size of constituencies has been a recurring problem in legislative apportionment. Electoral reforms are often instituted to eliminate malapportionments such as the system of rotten boroughs in Britain and the practice of gerrymandering in the United States. Size disparities resulting from changes in population continue to exist in many countries, though they are seldom very large. (One exceptional example was the difference, during the British general election of 2001, between the constituency of the Western Isles in Scotland, which contained an electorate of fewer than 25,000 people, and the constituency of the Isle of Wight, whose electorate exceeded 100,000.)
The authority to alter apportionment can be an important tool in maintaining the power of the incumbent political party. Constituencies can be defined, for example, in a way that concentrates the power of the opposition into relatively few districts and gives the ruling party narrow majorities in a large number of districts; the incumbent party is thereby awarded a disproportionately large share of seats. Using a different strategy, individual incumbents sometimes seek to influence the apportionment process to give themselves districts with no substantial opposition. Although politically motivated apportionment is generally considered an abuse, U.S. courts have regarded the practice as legal.
During the last two decades of the 20th century, some state legislatures in the United States undertook what amounted to racial gerrymandering to preserve the integrity and power of special-interest blocs of voters in large cities and other regions and to increase minority representation. However, the Supreme Court subsequently invalidated several racially gerrymandered majority-minority congressional districts and ruled that race could not be the determining factor in the drawing of constituency boundaries.