3 ms·
There are already 435 members of the House of Representatives. I don't think most Americans would like there to be too many more -- it would get unwieldy. Also,
by Bostonian 3y ago
There are already 435 members of the House of Representatives. I don't think most Americans would like there to be too many more -- it would get unwieldy. Also, expanding the House will likely lead to a decline in representative quality, since it's easier to be the "best" candidate among x people than 1.3*x people. Already there are numerous people in Congress who I think are utter clowns.
- blacksqr 3y agoThe UK House of Commons has 650 members, representing a population a fifth the size of the US. We are way behind the norm. I find it hard to imagine that any sizable percentage of Americans would object to greater representation and a more direct and undiluted choice for their representative due to any sense of the House's size being "unwieldy." The greater the size of a district, the harder it is for any individual voter's voice to be heard.
- Bostonian 3y agoMost Americans oppose expanding the size of the House. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/09/19/how-americans-view-proposals-to-change-the-political-system/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/09/19/how-american... 'About three-in-ten adults (29%) say the size of the House of Representatives should be increased beyond its current 435 members, while a narrow majority (53%) say the size of the House should stay the same. Another 15% prefer to decrease the size of the House.'
- blacksqr 3y agoBostonian, assuming that you are from Massachusetts, the Mass. House has 160 members, each representing about 44,000 people. The average population of a Federal house district is over 750,000. Does the size of the Mass. House feel unwieldy?