How many people per representative?

Answer 1

Based on the U.S. Census Bureau's July 2013 population estimates and the 2011 apportionment, here is the average district size of the United States and of each state (the number of Representatives is shown in parentheses):

• 726,733 -- United States (435)
• 690,532 -- Alabama (7)
• 735,132 -- Alaska (1)
• 736,292 -- Arizona (9)
• 739,843 -- Arkansas (4)
• 723,255 -- California (53)
• 752,624 -- Colorado (7)
• 719,216 -- Connecticut (5)
• 925,749 -- Delaware (1)
• 724,180 -- Florida (27)
• 713,726 -- Georgia (14)
• 702,027 -- Hawaii (2)
• 806,068 -- Idaho (2)
• 715,674 -- Illinois (18)
• 730,100 -- Indiana (9)
• 772,604 -- Iowa (4)
• 723,489 -- Kansas (4)
• 732,549 -- Kentucky (6)
• 770,912 -- Louisiana (6)
• 664,151 -- Maine (2)
• 741,102 -- Maryland (8)
• 743,647 -- Massachusetts (9)
• 706,830 -- Michigan (14)
• 677,548 -- Minnesota (8)
• 747,802 -- Mississippi (4)
• 755,521 -- Missouri (8)
• 1,015,165 -- Montana (1)
• 622,839 -- Nebraska (3)
• 697,534 -- Nevada (4)
• 661,730 -- New Hampshire (2)
• 741,612 -- New Jersey (12)
• 695,096 -- New Mexico (3)
• 727,820 -- New York (27)
• 757,543 -- North Carolina (13)
• 723,393 -- North Dakota (1)
• 723,176 -- Ohio (16)
• 770,114 -- Oklahoma (5)
• 786,013 -- Oregon (5)
• 709,656 -- Pennsylvania (18)
• 525,756 -- Rhode Island (2)
• 682,120 -- South Carolina (7)
• 844,877 -- South Dakota (1)
• 721,775 -- Tennessee (9)
• 734,672 -- Texas (36)
• 725,218 -- Utah (4)
• 626,630 -- Vermont (1)
• 750,946 -- Virginia (11)
• 697,141 -- Washington (10)
• 618,101 -- West Virginia (3)
• 717,839 -- Wisconsin (8)
• 582,658 -- Wyoming (1)

Here they are again, in order by average size (actual size in states with one Rep.):

• 1,015,165 -- Montana (1)
• 925,749 -- Delaware (1)
• 844,877 -- South Dakota (1)
• 806,068 -- Idaho (2)
• 786,013 -- Oregon (5)
• 772,604 -- Iowa (4)
• 770,912 -- Louisiana (6)
• 770,114 -- Oklahoma (5)
• 757,543 -- North Carolina (13)
• 755,521 -- Missouri (8)
• 752,624 -- Colorado (7)
• 750,946 -- Virginia (11)
• 747,802 -- Mississippi (4)
• 743,647 -- Massachusetts (9)
• 741,612 -- New Jersey (12)
• 741,102 -- Maryland (8)
• 739,843 -- Arkansas (4)
• 736,292 -- Arizona (9)
• 735,132 -- Alaska (1)
• 734,672 -- Texas (36)
• 732,549 -- Kentucky (6)
• 730,100 -- Indiana (9)
• 727,820 -- New York (27)
• 726,733 -- United States (435)
• 725,218 -- Utah (4)
• 724,180 -- Florida (27)
• 723,489 -- Kansas (4)
• 723,393 -- North Dakota (1)
• 723,255 -- California (53)
• 723,176 -- Ohio (16)
• 721,775 -- Tennessee (9)
• 719,216 -- Connecticut (5)
• 717,839 -- Wisconsin (8)
• 715,674 -- Illinois (18)
• 713,726 -- Georgia (14)
• 709,656 -- Pennsylvania (18)
• 706,830 -- Michigan (14)
• 702,027 -- Hawaii (2)
• 697,534 -- Nevada (4)
• 697,141 -- Washington (10)
• 695,096 -- New Mexico (3)
• 690,532 -- Alabama (7)
• 682,120 -- South Carolina (7)
• 677,548 -- Minnesota (8)
• 664,151 -- Maine (2)
• 661,730 -- New Hampshire (2)
• 626,630 -- Vermont (1)
• 622,839 -- Nebraska (3)
• 618,101 -- West Virginia (3)
• 582,658 -- Wyoming (1)
• 525,756 -- Rhode Island (2)

Even if we assume that the size of each district is the average size for its state, the entire collection of 435 data points still has a standard deviation of 34,258 (standard deviation is a measure of how much a collection of numbers deviates from its average). 34,258 is 4.7% of the average. But since it is highly unlikely that any state has two congressional districts with exactly the same population, the actual standard deviation is greater.

If the 2013 estimates used here were actual census results, and a reapportionment were done based on them, only one House seat would be transferred: Minnesota would lose a seat, and North Carolina would gain a seat. That would change Minnesota's average district size from 677,548 to 774,340, and North Carolina's would change from 757,543 to 703,433. Our hypothetical standard deviation would improve from 34,258 to 33,981 (which still rounds to 4.7%).