Skip to comments.Enlarging the House of Representatives
Posted on 01/07/2014 12:48:52 PM PST by Theoria
Last week, I discussed the case for increasing the size of the California State Legislature and perhaps others as well. But the case for increasing the size of the House of Representatives is even stronger.
The size of the House was one of the most hotly debated issues at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787. The delegates initially proposed a figure of 40,000 people per congressional district. But George Washington thought this number was too high and on the only occasion in which he addressed the convention he asked that it be reduced to 30,000. This change was agreed to and that is what Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution requires.
The Constitution is silent on the question of whether the House would increase in size as the population of the United States grew. James Madison was among those with concerns that the House would not increase in size, leading to increasingly large districts, which he expressed in Federalist 55. He therefore proposed that the first amendment to the Constitution be one that guaranteed an increase in the House proportional to rising population.
(Excerpt) Read more at economix.blogs.nytimes.com ...
sorry, the last thing we need are more “public servants” to support.
I also would like to see the state govts become unicameral; Nebraska does it and do you ever hear complaints about Nebraska? No.
We can’t afford them as it is. Maybe, set up a pool of informed volunteer citizens that study issues and vote on them via the internet. We can start the pool off with Free Republic membership.
“Not only had the relative populations of the various states changed, but the populations within states as well, generally reducing the rural population and increasing the urban population. As a political matter, this was important because rural voters tended to support Prohibition, while those in the cities favored repeal.”
This would give more votes to Democrat States like California, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York.
(Not only “no” but hell no).
This only makes sense in the context of more states; breaking up the current 50 (57?) into 100 or more. The only way to get the elitism out of DC is to make is passe.
Yeah! More social budgets, travel expenses and lifetime pensions for two years of service. Yippee.
Lots of people won’t like this. Shifts the Electoral College to big states. Dilutes the power of individual members of the House and accordingly increases the institutional power of the Senate.
Amen. That said, I think the formula for deciding representation should include a component of land area involved. You could put up five high rise buildings close to each other in any city, and have more people than in several combined counties in some areas of the US. There should be a population density adjustment such that beyond a certain density you do not receive additional representation. This would dilute out to some extent what I feel is over-representation of the urban viewpoint in national politics.
Nebraska is a rural, White and Conservative state. What works for them isn’t a one size fits all solution for others.
representatives were about 2 1/2 times in number as senators (65 vs 26)...
(now, it is 435 vs 100 or about 4 1/2 times in number).
representatives were 1 per 30,000 in population
(now, that would require 10,000 members in the house of representatives).
there were 2 1/2 times as many representatives as senators
(now, that would translate to 250 representatives).
I'd go along with it, though, in exchange for strict, lifetime, term limits: after serving 5 terms in the HoR, you have a choice: a .44 to the head, or the Big Dripper.
Perhaps, and a repeal of the 17th.
No action on the amendment has been completed by:
Just repeal the 17th Amendment and ratify term limits.
Nonsense: increase the seats, but FREEZE THE BUDGET.
Every Congressman shares a standard office cube with their aide. Singular.
They get 3 aides, max, back in the home district.
And living space ? Put up a few high-rise apartments on Anacostia Naval Station. Assign an apartment to each member of the House. Want Better ? Pay for it out of your OWN pocket. . .
“Nebraska is a rural, White and Conservative state.”
Yes, but there are other states like that, Nebraska is the ONLY state with a unicameral legislature. There might be arguments against it, but basically I think we have way too many professional politicians in this country, their many hands have truly been a devil’s workshop.
I would not support that on the national level, but for the states, one house should be adequate.
It’s not just a politician problem. We have a bureaucrat problem, armies and armies of government workers growing like a cancer and bleeding our treasury dry.
First, repeal the 17th Ammendment.
I’ll check out Goldberg’s piece. But I DO NOT want more of these people in full time roles, with huge staffs, all on my dime.
Oh, and btw, NO RETIREMENT BENES FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS, they can have a 401K and that is it.
Good ideas, but making them go to DC in August is just cruel & unusual!