At large (before a noun: at-large) is a description for members of a governing body who are elected or appointed to represent a whole membership or population (notably a city, county, state, province, nation, club or association), rather than a subset. In multi-hierarchical bodies, the term rarely extends to a tier beneath the highest division. A contrast is implied, with certain electoral districts or narrower divisions. It can be given to the associated territory, if any, to denote its undivided nature, in a specific context. Unambiguous synonyms are the prefixes of cross-, all- or whole-, such as cross-membership, or all-state.
The term is used as a suffix referring to specific members (such as the U.S. congressional Representative/the Member/Rep. for Wyoming at large). It figures as a generic prefix of its subject matter (such as Wyoming is an at-large U.S. congressional district, at present). It is commonly used when making or highlighting a direct contrast with subdivided equivalents that may be past or present, or seen in exotic comparators. It indicates that the described zone has no further subsets used for the same representative purpose. An exception is a nil-exceptions arrangement of overlapping tiers (resembling or being district and regional representatives, one set of which is at large) for return to the very same chamber, and consequent issue of multiple ballots for plural voting to every voter. This avoids plural voting competing with single voting in the jurisdiction, an inherent different level of democratic power.
Examples of a democratic power disparity were found in a small number of states at certain U.S. Congresses, between 1853 and 1967, and in the old lower houses of the United Kingdom and Ireland, whereby certain voters could vote for (and lobby) at-large (whole-state/County) and district(-based) representatives to them, giving zones of plural voting and thus representation contrasting with zones, for the same national assembly, of single voting and representation.Electoral Reform in England and Wales, by Charles Seymour (David & Charles Reprints 1970)The Parliaments of England by Henry Stooks Smith (1st edition published in three volumes 1844–50), second edition edited (in one volume) by F.W.S. Craig (Political Reference Publications 1973) In 1964 the U.S. Supreme Court banned such plural voting for the U.S. Congress (thus banning at-large, whole-state congressional districts which overlap state subdivision congressional districts).
Universal principles apply regardless whether election(s) are for a member at large, or not.
a single seat/position/representative: entails a single-winner voting system, often Plurality and First-past-the-post; a panel/slate/group of seats/positions/representatives: may entail a multi-winner contest using a multi-winner system such as proportional representation (whether in "pure" party-list form, as a party-list proportional tier of a mixed-member or parallel voting system, or STV leading forms), Single non-transferable vote (basic single-choice, multi-member), or block (basic multi-choice, multi-member) voting. On the other hand, a multi-winner district may still use a single-winner system if each seat is determined through a separate contest. (British Columbia used this "post/seat" method in its multi-member districts when it used instant-runoff voting in 1952 and 1953.)Electoral history of BC, p. 240 https://elections.bc.ca/docs/rpt/1871-1986_ElectoralHistoryofBC.pdf accessed Dec. 13, 2024
Canada Many municipalities in Canada elect part or all of their city councils at-large. In most, the mayor is elected at-large as well.
Municipal election at-large is widespread in small towns to avoid "them and us" cultural dissociation produced by partition of voters into wards and their representatives thus being seen to represent only a specific part of the city. It is also used in many large cities in Canada. The voting method in all such elections and multi-member wards today is plurality block voting. (In the past, single transferable voting (STV) was used in 20 Canadian municipalities, either in at-large contests or multi-member wards.)
Notable larger instances are, from west to east: The main cities of British Columbia: Vancouver, Victoria, Surrey, and Richmond (all councillors at large and adopt specialist spokesman, executive, or committee roles). St. Albert and all other municipalities in Alberta (except Edmonton, Calgary, and Wood Buffalo) (all councillors at large) Portage la Prairie, Manitoba (all councillors at large) North Bay, Ontario (all councillors at large) Thunder Bay, Ontario (seven councillors elected in single-member wards, five councillors elected at large)Guide to City Services, Municipal Government, Wards. Retrieved 4 June 2007 Timmins, Ontario (four rural wards with one councillor each, one urban ward with four councillors)
(As well, the three territories - Yukon, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories - are federally served in the Parliament of Canada by one Member of Parliament and Senator each. These are so sparsely populated that even one member each is over-representation. They have high apportionment but are ethnically diverse and of exceptional geographical size. Provinces are divided to make up the other 340 electoral districts (ridings or comtés). Canada's 102 senators are appointed to serve a large region within a province or a city.)
European Union The Conference on the Future of Europe has proposed adding "transnational lists" to the European Parliament, in which a small number of members are elected by the entire European Union at large from Union-wide party lists. This is among a number of proposed reforms to deepen European integration.
Israel
In Israel, elections for the Knesset (the national parliament) are conducted at large by proportional representation from party lists. Election of municipal and town (but not regional) councils are on the same basis.
Kazakhstan Kazakhstan elects the proportional representation portion of its lower house, the Mäjilis, from a single nationwide multi-member district using closed party-list proportional representation.
Since electoral reforms adopted in 2022, 69 of the 98 seats in the Mäjilis are filled from this at-large national constituency, with seats allocated according to the parties' share of the national vote. A 5% national electoral threshold applies to parties seeking representation.
Netherlands
In the Netherlands, elections for the House of Representatives (the lower house of the States-General, the national parliament) are conducted at large by proportional representation from party lists.
Philippines
This manner of election applies to the Senate. All voters can cast twelve votes to refresh half of the Senate, namely twelve senators, from a longer list of candidates. The simple tally determines the winners (plurality-at-large voting).
Provinces with smaller populations elect their House representative at large. Some cities that has its own congressional district also elect its representatives this way. Most other provinces and a few cities are divided into two or more districts. Party-list elections are elected nationwide at-large.
Likewise, the Sangguniang Kabataan (Youth Councils), Sangguniang Barangay (Village Councils), Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Councils) and some Sangguniang Panlungsod (City Councils) elect the other members. It follows that such true or quasi-local government units do not in the purest sense elect members at large when their geography is analysed, as each member co-exists with the others who have territorial overlap, as representing greater or lower-rank districts. The members are by law chosen by the public directly or indirectly. Members chosen by the City Council or the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (Provincial Board) are elected such that the city or province may be split into as many as seven districts, and each then elects at least two members.
United States Article One of the United States Constitution provides for direct election of members of the House of Representatives. The Uniform Congressional District Act, enacted in 1967 and codified as , dictates that representatives must be elected from geographical districts and that these must be single-member districts. Indeed it confirms when the state has a single representative, that will be a representative at large.
U.S. House of Representatives States as at-large congressional districts Alaska Delaware North Dakota South Dakota Vermont Wyoming
Former at-large congressional districts
Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia
Non-voting at-large congressional districts American Samoa American Virgin Islands Cherokee Nation District of Columbia Guam Puerto Rico Northern Mariana Islands
Former non-voting at-large congressional districts
Alabama Territory Alaska Territory Arizona Territory Colorado Territory Dakota Territory Florida Territory Hawaii Territory Idaho Territory Illinois Territory Indiana Territory Iowa Territory Kansas Territory Mississippi Territory Missouri Territory Montana Territory Nevada Territory New Mexico Territory Northwest Territory Oklahoma Territory Oregon Territory Orleans Territory Philippines Southwest Territory Utah Territory Washington Territory Wisconsin Territory Wyoming Territory
Simultaneous at-large and sub-state-size congressional districts This is a table of every such instance. It shows the situation applied to a small, varying group of states in three periods. The 33rd Congress began in 1853; it ended two years later. The 38th began in 1863; the 50th ended in 1889. The 53rd began in 1893; the 89th ended in January 1967, the final such period. This was due to the 1964 case of Reynolds v. Sims: the United States Supreme Court determined that the general basis of apportionment must be "one person, one vote."Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964).
Congress State & Number of at-large seats 33rd MS (1) 38th IL (1) 39th IL (1) 40th IL (1) 41st IL (1) 42nd IL (1) 43rd AL (2), AR (1), IN (2), LA (1), NY (1), PA (3), SC (1), TN (1), TX (2) 44th AL (2) 48th AR (1), CA (2), GA (1), KS (4), NY (1), NC (1), PA (1), VA (1) 49th PA (1) 50th PA (1) 53rd IL (2), KS (1), PA (2) 54th KS (1), PA (2) 55th KS (1), PA (2) 56th KS (1), PA (2) 57th KS (1), PA (2) 58th CO (1), CT (1), KS (1) 59th CO (1), CT (1), KS (1) 60th CO (1), CT (1) 61st CO (1), CT (1) 62nd CO (1), CT (1) 63rd AL (1), CO (2), FL (1), IL (2), MI (1), MN (1), OH (1), OK (3), PA (4), TX (2), WA (2), WV (1) 64th AL (1), IL (2), PA (4), TX (2), WV (1) 65th IL (2), PA (4), TX (2) 66th IL (2), PA (4) 67th IL (2), PA (4) 68th IL (2) 69th IL (2) 70th IL (2) 71st IL (2) 72nd IL (2) 73rd CT (1), FL (1), IL (2), NY (2), OH (2), OK (1), TX (3) 74th CT (1), FL (1), IL (2), NY (2), OH (2), OK (1) 75th CT (1), IL (2), NY (2), OH (2), OK (1) 76th CT (1), IL (2), NY (2), OH (2), OK (1) 77th CT (1), IL (2), NY (2), OH (2), OK (1) 78th CT (1), FL (1), IL (1), NY (2), OH (1), PA (1) 79th CT (1), IL (1), OH (1) 80th CT (1), IL (1), OH (1) 81st CT (1), OH (1) 82nd CT (1), OH (1) 83rd CT (1), TX (1), WA (1) 84th CT (1), TX (1), WA (1) 85th CT (1), TX (1), WA (1) 86th CT (1) 87th CT (1) 88th AL (8), CT (1), MD (1), MI (1), OH (1), TX (1) 89th MD (1), OH (1), TX (1)
State elections As of 2021, ten U.S. states have at least one legislative chamber which uses multi-winner at-large districts:
Arizona House of Representatives (for all representatives in all sessions)