| A selection-win by votation must meet the needs of the voters: and that need can be described mathematically-- to the extent that voting is a system or science (denoted Political Science, a specific system application of statistics) |
[under reconstruction - from my 1995-(election) web-published article]
Insight lead the country's Founders (USA in this example) to Constitute government with written laws that need never change,- save by emendation. But these sufficient laws do need rightful interpretation. The Representation in Congress received by voters was first estimated as one per thirty-thousand free Persons (a number deemed by the Founders, both too large and too small). But even-so if that rule were applied directly today, the House (of Representatives) would number eight thousand members;-- the main meeting-building proportions alone would equal a small stadium (unless by Internet: as would be virtual).
Could the original intent be interpreted? Yes, mathematical systematics attempts it;- but which historically has produced some weird conclusions that don't meet the voters needs as well as say, a -better- reduction.
Contemporarily, by Census 2000, we find some 281.4 million Persons (USA) Represented for their concept of nation in 50 States (excluding the Capitol, a District); in 1787, extrapolating back-beyond the 1790 Census, some 3.55 million Persons in 13 States (the number of Persons was a best-estimate: not a regular tally). Assigning to each equal-but independent energy-of-diversity to apply collectively to the whole, the average potential-of-diversity is proportional to the square-root of this total:-- cf energy:potential::square:root.
But, Congressional Houses within themselves operate by thorough discussion and agreement among their equal members: -potentially additive (before the vote), and- energetically by the square.-- An ideal Representation may thus equal (or above) the square-root of the population, or a portion above square-root (much-less than linear)....
We try in thousands for scale, plus an extra half for each State (United States) to allow for rounding-up, as suits the Constitutional notion of minimum Representation:-- √ (3550000/1000) + (13/2) = 59.6+6.5 = 66.1 Representatives ... a nice number, serendipitously: they actually took 65.
But thereafter, Congress itself several times reestimated how-many Representatives the apportionment should elect:-- it was done by artistic feel still based on the simple direct rule: which means they had no rule for following the rule ... and today, stuck since ca 1910, the number is 435;- while the entropic -better reduction- would elect √ (281400000/1000) + (50/2) = 530 + 25 = 555, minimum (more-linear would go more).
___
ELECTION:
A secondary note in relation to the subject of "term limits"-- Two consecutive plus one non-consecutive third term, provides for election, reelection, and retro-election ... any additional terms are reduplications (save the partial term, typically limited to a half term, that comes in the case of a vice president ascending in the absence of the president).
A premise discovery under the title,