2 ms·
It was intended to continue to grow with population, I copied this from a previous comment of mine bc I'm lazy: "The U.S. Constitution called for at least one
by drewmol 9y ago
It was intended to continue to grow with population, I copied this from a previous comment of mine bc I'm lazy:
"The U.S. Constitution called for at least one Representative per state and that no more than one for every 30,000 persons." [1]
The Appointment Act of 1911 and subsequent Permanent Appointment Act of 1929 capped the total number of House congressional representatives at 435 [2], so the degree of seperation between an individual elector and their representative in any given congressional district continues to grow as population increases. This also has an effect on the Electoral College, as it's membership numbers are based on the number of congress persons. Furthermore, I will assume this limit, combined with a growing population will increase the chances of a Presidential Candidate winning election without also winning the national popular vote, as we have seen on multiple occasions in recent decades.
[1] http://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1901-1950/The.. http://history.house.gov/Historical-Highlights/1901-1950/The....
[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reapportionment_Act_of_1929 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reapportionment_Act_of_1929
- CalChris 9y agoThe Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand Remember, the same people who wrote the Second Amendment wrote this. In any case, that was superseded post Civil War by Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment. That allows for the Reapportionment of 1929. It would seem that that would override the 1 House member minimum but it doesn't because, because nothing.