This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

A comparison between the methods of apportionment using power indices: the case of the U.S. presidential election

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Fabrice Barthélémy () (THEMA, Université de Cergy-Pontoise)
Mathieu MARTIN () (THEMA, Université de Cergy-Pontoise)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this paper, we compare the five more famous methods of apportionment, the methods of Adams, Dean, Hill, Webster and Jefferson. The criteria used for this comparison is the minimization of a distance between a power vector and a population vector. The power is measured with the well-known Banzhaf power index. The populations are the ones of the different States of the U.S. We then compare the apportionment methods in terms of their ability to bring closer the power of the States to their relative population: this ensures that every citizen in the country gets the same power. The U.S. presidential election by Electors is studied through 22 censuses since 1790. Our analysis is largely based on the book written by Balinski and Young (2001). The empirical findings are linked with theoretical results.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.u-cergy.fr/thema/repec/2007-26.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise in its series THEMA Working Papers with number 2007-26.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ema:worpap:2007-26

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 33, boulevard du port - 95011 Cergy-Pontoise Cedex
Phone: 33 1 34 25 60 63
Fax: 33 1 34 25 62 33
Email:
Web page: http://www.u-cergy.fr/thema
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Lise Patureau).

Related research
Keywords: Banzhaf index methods of apportionment distances balance population-power.

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Gelman, Andrew & Katz, Jonathan N. & Tuerlinckx, Francis, 2002. "The Mathematics and Statistics of Voting Power," Working Papers 1141, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences. [Downloadable!]
  2. Vincent Merlin & Marc Feix & Dominique Lepelley & Jean-Louis Rouet, 2007. "On the Voting Power of an Alliance and the Subsequent Power of its Members," Post-Print halshs-00010168_v1, HAL. [Downloadable!]
  3. Fabrice Barthélémy & Mathieu MARTIN & Vincent MERLIN, 2007. "On the performance of the Shapley Shubik and Banzhaf power indices for the allocations of mandates," THEMA Working Papers 2007-25, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise. [Downloadable!]
  4. Moshé Machover & Dan S. Felsenthal, 2001. "The Treaty of Nice and qualified majority voting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 431-464. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Leech, Dennis, 2002. " Designing the Voting System for the Council of the European Union," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 113(3-4), pages 437-64, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Marc Feix & Dominique Lepelley & Vincent Merlin & Jean-Louis Rouet, 2007. "On the voting power of an alliance and the subsequent power of its members," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 181-207, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS is not the only service displaying RePEc data. Choose on RePEc which service fits your needs best.

This page was last updated on 2008-8-11.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.