Delimitation Equity Project Resource Guide - IFES

Delimitation Equity Project
boundaries, as well as other geographic features, are generally listed as factors to be
taken into account. 19 Consideration for the means of communication and ease of travel,
and respect for communities of interest, are other commonly identified criteria. 20
Equal Population
The most widely accepted rule for delimiting electoral districts is that constituencies
should be relatively equal in population. All 60 countries in our survey that delimited
districts indicated that population equality was a criterion considered, and most indicated
that it was the single most important delimitation requirement (or one of several of the
most important).
The degree to which countries require population “equality” and the population figure (for
example, total population, citizen population, registered voters) that is used to determine
equality differs across countries. A majority (53 percent) of the countries surveyed
indicated that “total population” was the population base used for determining equality
across constituencies. Another 34 percent reported registered voters as the population
base. Six countries (almost all European) stated that citizen population was the relevant
base for determining population equality. The voting age population was mentioned as
the base by one country (Lesotho), and the number of voters in the previous election by
another country (Belarus).
The degree to which countries demand population equality also varies. Close to 75
percent of the countries surveyed reported no specific limit regarding the extent to which
constituencies are permitted to deviate from the population quota. 21 Those that did
report a tolerance limit indicated a range from “virtually no deviation allowed” (the United
States) to as high as a 30 percent tolerance limit (Singapore).
The United States is unique in its adherence to the doctrine of equal population. No
other country requires deviations as minimal as the “one person, one vote” standard that
has been imposed by U.S. courts since the early 1960s. In the 1983 court case Karcher
v. Daggett, the U.S. Supreme Court held that there is no point at which population
deviations in a congressional redistricting plan can be considered inconsequential:
“[t]here are no de minimus variations which could practically be avoided but which
nonetheless meet the standard of Article I, Section 2 [of the U.S. Constitution] without
justification.” 22 The Court went on to reject a New Jersey congressional redistricting plan
that had a total population deviation of only 0.7 percent. Following this decision, most
states interpreted Karcher as requiring the adoption of congressional redistricting plans
with exact mathematical population equality or, at minimum, with the lowest possible
population deviation. Although the courts later upheld the legality of some redistricting
19 Geographic criteria of one kind or another were mentioned by 85 percent of the countries included in the
survey that delimited electoral districts.
20 The means of communication and/or ease of travel are mentioned as factors to take into account by 21 of
the 60 countries. Nineteen of the 60 countries listed communities of interest as a criterion that should be
considered when delimiting electoral districts.
21 The population quota is the average number of persons per constituency (or per representative in the case
of multimember districts). It is calculated by dividing the total number of districts to be drawn (or
representatives to be elected in the case of multimember districts) into the population of the country.
22 Karcher v. Daggett, 462 U.S. 725, 734 (1983).
28