Huntington Hill Method assigns a 0 for allocation

[ebrewer1]

Hi, I was trying to apportion US Senate seats using the Huntington-Hill Method using Census Estimates, and for some reason, my dataset produced a 0 for Connecticut. Interestingly, in some years CT did get a seat, but in others it didn't. I calculated the percentage population of CT of the whole US for each year, and it seems that after 2010, which is the first row in the attached data frame, the Connecticut value goes to 0, even though it isn't the smallest state by population. Is there a reason why this is happening?

This second image is of the 2011 population data, and the senate seat estimates. Connecticut is at 0 strangely

[crflynn]

It could be a bug. Could you provide example code so I can try to debug?

[wtchen]

@crflynn See apportionment.huntington_hill([5609968,2873709,83801,16295,10107,6467], 17)

The results seem counter-intuitive. Either every party should receive one seat (ideal, since this is how the US does it), or only parties which receive votes over a certain threshold (e.g. Hare quota) should receive seats.