Final answer:
Supporters of equal representation are typically from smaller states, while advocates for representation by population usually come from larger states. The U.S. Congress's current bicameral structure, with a Senate that provides equal representation and a House of Representatives based on population, is a compromise between these two principles.
Step-by-step explanation:
Those who would support equal representation typically come from smaller states because it ensures that every state has the same influence in the legislative process, despite differences in population size. Proponents of representation by population are often from larger states, advocating that the number of legislative seats should be proportional to the number of people in a state, to reflect its population size fairly in Congress. Under the proportional representation system, parties would receive legislative seats in accordance with the percentage of votes they secure in an election, giving smaller parties a voice in government as well.
For instance, the 1996 elections indicated that if the United States had implemented proportional representation then, Ross Perot's Reform Party would have secured seats in Congress matching the 8 percent national support for his candidacy. Meanwhile, history shows that some states have tried to balance these approaches. Pennsylvania, for example, apportioned legislative seats based on taxable residents, and North Carolina set a specific number of representatives from each county, regardless of population.
The current structure of the United States Congress reflects a compromise between these ideals, with the Senate offering equal representation for each state and the House of Representatives apportioning seats based on state populations derived from the national census.