Understanding the New States Paradox

The video tutorial explains the New States Paradox in apportionment, where adding a new state with its fair share of seats can affect the number of seats apportioned to other states. This paradox was first observed in 1907 when Oklahoma became a state. The tutorial uses a hypothetical example of apportioning police officers to districts using Hamilton's method, demonstrating how adding a new district can change the distribution of resources, illustrating the paradox.

What is the New States Paradox?

• A situation where adding a new state does not change the number of seats for existing states.

• A situation where a state gains more seats than its population warrants.

• A situation where adding a new state changes the number of seats for existing states.

• A situation where a state loses all its seats.

In the historical example, which state gained a seat when Oklahoma was added?

• New York

• Texas

• California

• Maine

What method is used to apportion the police officers in the example?

• Jefferson's Method

• Hamilton's Method

• Webster's Method

• Adams' Method

How many officers were initially assigned to District A before the city expanded?

• 10

• 9

• 11

• 12

What was the population increase percentage when the city expanded to include District C?

• 4%

• 3%

• 6%

• 5%

How many total officers were there after the city expanded?

• 115

• 100

• 105

• 110

Which district received the extra officer after the city expanded?

• District C

• District B

• District A

• None

What was the final number of officers assigned to District B after the expansion?

• 88

• 90

• 91

• 89

What does the final comparison of officer distribution illustrate?

• The fairness of Hamilton's Method.

• The need for more officers.

• The New States Paradox.

• The stability of apportionment methods.

What is the main takeaway from the lesson on the New States Paradox?

• Adding new states always benefits existing states.

• Apportionment methods are always fair.

• Adding new states can unpredictably affect existing states' seat distribution.

• The number of seats is always proportional to the population.