Appendix 4 of Analysis of Apportionment Sensitivity to Population Miscounts

Analysis Summary

The two apportionment population scenarios used for this analysis are summarized in the table below as columns A through C:

• Column A – Official 2020 Apportionment Population by state
• Column B – Adjusted Population Census per this analysis. (See Appendix 1 for explanation.)
• Column C – Percent change in Apportionment Population (from column A to column B).

For both of those population scenarios, the apportionment analysis of 435 Representatives is summarized in columns D through G:

• Column D – The 24^th Apportionment (effective as of the 118^th Congress).
• Column E – Revised apportionment of 435 Representatives based on Adjusted Population. (See Appendix 2.)
• Column F – Percent change of from Column D to Column E.
• Column G – Ratio of % change in representation (F) to % change in population (C).

And for both of those population scenarios, the apportionment analysis of 6,692 Representatives is summarized in columns H though K:

• Column H – Apportionment of 6,692 Representatives based on the official apportionment population (A).
• Column I – The revised apportionment based on the adjusted population. (See Appendix 3.)
• Column J – Percent change from column H to column I.
• Column K – Ratio of % change in representation (J) to % change in population (C).

Note that for the 435-Representative scenario, relatively small percentage changes in the states’ populations totals (C) can produce a few very consequential changes in representation (F). Contrast that with the 6,692-Representative scenario, in which the changes in representation (J) are not only much more commensurate with the population changes, but also more equitably spread across a larger number of states.

©Thirty-Thousand.org [Published 07/14/22]