Commentaries on Representation

The Blog for Thirty-Thousand.org

Commentaries on Representation

The Blog for Thirty-Thousand.org

The Wyoming Rule is conceptually flawed

In addition to being ineffective relative to mitigating inequitable electoral disparities, the Wyoming Rule is poorly reasoned in its conception

The Wyoming Rule asserts that our total number of Representatives should be determined by dividing the nation’s total apportionment population by the total population of our least populous state. Applying this simple formula to the 2020 apportionment population results in a total of 573 Representatives.1This is calculated by dividing the total apportionment population by Wyoming’s population as follows: 331,108,434 ÷ 577,719 = 573.13  → rounds to 573 Representatives.

However, an analysis reveals that increasing the number of Representatives from 435 to 573 would not only work to the detriment of Wyoming. but it would also fail to noticeably reduce the numerous problems resulting from having a grossly undersized House.

In addition, inherent in the Wyoming Rule is a peculiarity that makes it unsuitable as a guiding principle. It is, in effect, the smallest-state rule, wherein the population size of the smallest state is divided into the total population to determine the total number of Representatives. As illustrated in the chart below, determining the number of Representatives based on this principle would result in absurdly fluctuating House sizes over time.

From 1900 to 1960, this algorithm could have been called the Nevada Rule, if named for the least populous state. In 1970, that distinction passed to Wyoming thanks to the success of Nevada’s luxury casino resorts during the ’60s. And even during Wyoming’s smallest-state reign, the total number of Representatives would have fluctuated over time. Clearly, basing the size of the House on the smallest state’s population would be neither a sound nor enduring principle.

Unfortunately, determining the equitable size of the House does not lend itself to such facile solutions.  And nor will adding just a few hundred Representatives correct centuries of representational degradation of the citizenry.

© Thirty-Thousand.org [published 09/18/2022]

More Blog Posts:

>> See more posts

TTO Forum Banner

Massive electoral districts also corrupt the Senate.

 

Because the Congressional senatorial races are statewide, the average senate district contains over 6.6 million people, which is nearly nine times that of the average House congressional district! It is therefore not surprising that Senators have a much greater need than Representatives to raise vast sums of money from PACs, corporations, and other Special Interest groups.

In 2020, there were 33 senatorial races (because only one-third of the 100 Senators are up for re-election every two years). During the 2019–2020 timeframe, over $2.1 billion dollars was raised for those senatorial races [source opensecrets.org]. This was even more than the total raised for all 435 House races! And bear in mind that this two-year total (2019 – 2020) represents only the final two years of a Senator’s six-year term – so presumably even more was raised by the incumbents during their term.

It is therefore not surprising that of the 31 incumbents seeking reelection, 26 were successful (84%), despite the fact that there were 206 challengers for all 31 of those races. [source opensecrets.org]. Unfortunately, unlike the congressional districts, these statewide districts cannot be downsized to reduce their need for campaign donations. However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a way to eliminate this problem.

As it turns out, the need for Senatorial candidates to raise so much money was created when the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913. The 17th Amendment requires that the Senators be popularly elected rather than be appointed by their states’ legislatures (as was required by the Constitution). Therefore, regardless of whatever benefits that the 17th amendment is thought to have, repealing it would be the most effective way to eliminate the need for 33 senatorial candidates to personally raise over $2 billion every two years.

Though the popular election of Senators was originally expected to be beneficial to the citizenry, the evidence indicates that the Senators are effectively being selected by the powerful Special Interests rather than being truly elected by the people.
 

 

17th Amendment pro & con:
Why we have, and should keep, the 17th Amendment
Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • 1
    This is calculated by dividing the total apportionment population by Wyoming’s population as follows: 331,108,434 ÷ 577,719 = 573.13  → rounds to 573 Representatives.