±2%

Introduction

The United States Supreme Court has established a standard requiring that representatives be elected from districts as nearly equal in population as possible. In applying this standard, each state maps its districts to a close population tolerance. Because a combination of complete communities is unlikely to fall within this range, adherence to the population standard often requires splitting communities between districts. The standard is used as justification for not only a minimum number of straightforward divisions, but also some of the most flagrant gerrymanders in contemporary American politics.

One alternative to this situation would involve relaxing the population straitjacket to allow districts to be stretched around communities.

In the maps shown, the standard has been relaxed to permit districts up to 2% above or below the average population in the state.

The loosening of the population standard allows district boundaries to stretch to fit many more civil, regional, physical, and neighborhood boundaries. At any one time, only a few under-ratio (smaller population than the average-size district) counties need to be divided in order to meet the ±2% deviation standard. (Because they have few large neighbors, Chester County, PA; Camden County, NJ; and Plymouth County, MA frequently turn up on this list. Other counties that might be split include Burlington and Monmouth Counties, NJ and Ramsey County, MN.)

Smallest Majority of Congressional Districts (1980)

If each state could be divided into districts which are exactly equal in population, as the U.S. Supreme Court holds ideal, the districts would still vary in population from state to state. In 1980, the population of all 50 states, 225,867,174, might have been divided so that the smallest majority, the smallest 218 districts, would contain a population of 110,154,114, or 48.77% of the total. The largest minority, the largest 217 districts, would contain a the other 115,713,060, or 51.23% of the 50-state total.

If the range is loosened to allow a district to deviate up to 2% from the average for a state, the smallest 218 districts would contain a population of 109,916,524, or 48.66% of the 50-state total. The largest minority, the largest 217 districts, would contain the other 115,950,650, or 51.34% of the total.

The population which is transferred from the smallest majority to the largest minority by relaxing the standard, 237,590, is 46.8% of an average district, or 1/951 of the 50-state population. The smallest majority produced by the "ideal" system is already 2,779,473, or 5.35 districts short of the 50% which would reflect a true majority. By comparison, the reduction of smallest majority does not appear to be significant when compared with the number of communities nationwide which stand to receive cohesive representation.

See examples

Are legislative districts obsolete?

Visit Center for Voting and Democracy.