5 ms·

"The less representative the upper body of a national legislature, the greater the gap between the rich and the poor." Interestingly enough, one of the failed

"The less representative the upper body of a national legislature, the greater the gap between the rich and the poor." Interestingly enough, one of the failed amendments to the Constitution was have each member of the House of Representatives represent a max of 50,000 citizens. [1] I've wondered whether this would be a good change to our modern system where some representatives have 1m+ constituents. I mean, how can one person accurately represent the views of so many people? What a larger house would mean is an increase in the number of political parties as small groups of people could work to have their minority groups represented outside of a major political party. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Apportionment_Amendment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Apportionment_Am... EDIT: Here's a site with some information about the idea of increasing the size of the house: http://www.thirty-thousand.org/ http://www.thirty-thousand.org/

twblalock 12y ago
If gerrymandering persists, the dysfunction of Congress will also persist, no matter how many members there are. Representatives have no incentives to behave responsibly under the current districting situation.
- stevesearer 12y ago
  One of the intended consequences of increasing the number of members is that each one is more easily replaced if they do not accurately represent the views of the constituents. My back of the envelope math gives the US 6400 member of the house at the current population which also has the effect of reducing each single member's importance.
  - twblalock 12y ago
    By drawing district lines around politically homogenous populations, gerrymandering guarantees that representatives accurately represent the views of their constituents and enables hyper-partisan behavior without consequences. Adding representatives does nothing to change that. 6400 gerrymandered districts will give us the same results as 435.

twblalock 12y ago

If gerrymandering persists, the dysfunction of Congress will also persist, no matter how many members there are. Representatives have no incentives to behave responsibly under the current districting situation.

stevesearer 12y ago
One of the intended consequences of increasing the number of members is that each one is more easily replaced if they do not accurately represent the views of the constituents. My back of the envelope math gives the US 6400 member of the house at the current population which also has the effect of reducing each single member's importance.
- twblalock 12y ago
  By drawing district lines around politically homogenous populations, gerrymandering guarantees that representatives accurately represent the views of their constituents and enables hyper-partisan behavior without consequences. Adding representatives does nothing to change that. 6400 gerrymandered districts will give us the same results as 435.