An Argument For Increasing The Size Of The House Of Representatives

[skews13]

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution states that "[t]he number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative." The argument for the 30,000 figure was made by James Madison in Federalist No. 56, who argued that figure as a reasonable compromise between a too-large constituency that would cause greater disconnect between the elected representative and the needs and wishes of the people of that constituency, and a too-large House of Representatives that would prove unwieldy and unable to work out its differences and complete its business.

Recognizing that the population of the fledgling republic would likely increase as time progressed, Madison noted that the number of Representatives would increase as population increased, and Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 established that a census would be taken every ten years starting in 1790 to determine (among other things, such as allocation of federal moneys collected through taxation) the number of Representatives to be encumbered by each state.

An argument for increasing the size of the House of Representatives

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution states that "[t]he number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative." The argument for the 30,000 figure was made by James...

www.dailykos.com

 

[AFrench2]

An Argument For Increasing The Size Of The House Of Representatives

The House has been 435 members for over 100 years, and in that time the population has more than tripled.

 

[Rambunctious]

What??? not doing enough damage for you as they are?....

 

[Auld Phart]

interesting..

based on that number,
Los Angeles would have 135 representatives,

Chicago would have 90

NYC would have 272

Brooklyn itself would have 76

Nothing like stacking the deck, right?

 

[occupied]

More politicians is not the answer to any problem we have.

 

[MarathonMike]

More politicians is not the answer to any problem we have.

We have a winner! What do we have for him Johnny?

 

[Hossfly]

More politicians is not the answer to any problem we have.

True. It would just be more hogs at the public trough.

 

[blackhawk]

Yeah because the 435 we have now work so well together increasing the size will only improve on that.

 

[occupied]

More politicians is not the answer to any problem we have.

True. It would just be more hogs at the public trough.

Quit voting for hogs then.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I tend to get a lot of ads while at usmb about increasing size.

At least when I'm not getting the ones about Russian brides..



That being said, when mindless partisans embrace schemes designed so clearly to increase democrat power, I tend to tune them out even more than these other ads.

 

[Blackrook]

Every Congressman is money wasted on his salary and the salary of all his secretaries he chases around the office.

 

[Darkwind]

interesting..

based on that number,
Los Angeles would have 135 representatives,

Chicago would have 90

NYC would have 272

Brooklyn itself would have 76

Nothing like stacking the deck, right?

That is the entire point of this thread. They want to ensure they have superior numbers. Imagine if you will, the conservative areas of the country where to pick up numbers that exceeded theirs. They'd drop it in a hot NY minute.

 

[Dekster]

interesting..

based on that number,
Los Angeles would have 135 representatives,

Chicago would have 90

NYC would have 272

Brooklyn itself would have 76

Nothing like stacking the deck, right?

The deck is stacked in favor of the two party system. If we even kept parity from 100 years go, that would create 800 additional seats which would mean that there would be a hell of a lot of turf to defend for either of the parties. You would start seeing liberatarians coming out of the south, greens coming out of the west, etc.