[DeuceTraveler]

I disagree. Because we have a small legislature the government is more wieldy. Too large a legislature can become cumbersome and make it harder to observe corruption in the government. We already have trouble watching the few hundred elected crooks in power.

[FairWitness]

I was surprised that a search did not show this article as being posted yet since Jonah's writing is generally posted here. Apologies if I missed it in my search.

I felt compelled to post this article since it coincided with a "vanity" that I posted a while ago: We are all "Disenfranchised" (Too Few Representatives)--Vanity.

[ClintonBeGone]

Ugh, I don't know if I could stomach a LARGER congress.

[ken5050]

Maybe the DUMBEST thing he's ever written....Marriage has turned his mind to mush...remember the old joke about Reagan's plan to cure poverty...50,000 teams in the NBA...

[RebelBanker]

Oh, come on, Jonah! More Congresscritters??!! You call that an answer? I think you are just blowing smoke! The idea is to get the House so big that it becomes completely unable to function, so no new laws can get passed. Then, all we have to do is let a lot of existing stupid laws sunset. Nice theory, but the current crop of Congresscritters wants to hold on to their perks and power, so will block any effort to dilute it, including increasing their number.

[FairWitness]

Re-posting a table from my earlier post, demonstrating how we (U.S.A.) have (except for India), the highest "population per representative" ratio amongst majot countries.

Population, Number of Representatives in House (Lower Chamber) of Congress and Ratio of Population to Representatives for Major Nations of the World

Nation	Population (1)	Representatives (2) ("Lower" Chamber)	Pop./Representative
India	1,045,845,226	545	1,918,982
United States	280,562,489	435	644,971
Indonesia	231,328,092	500	462,656
Bangladesh	133,376,684	300	444,589
Pakistan	147,663,429	342	431,764
China (PRC)	1,284,303,705	2,985	430,252
Philippines	84,525,639	220	384,207
Nigeria	129,934,911	360	360,930
Brazil	176,029,560	513	343,138
Russia	144,978,573	450	322,175
Japan	126,974,628	480	264,530
Peru	27,949,639	120	232,914
Iran	66,622,704	290	229,733
Mexico	103,400,165	500	206,800
Saudi Arabia	23,513,330	120	195,944
S. Korea	48,324,000	273	177,011
Vietnam	81,098,416	498	162,848
Egypt	70,712,345	454	155,754
Venezuela	24,287,670	165	147,198
Argentina	37,812,817	257	147,132
Kenya	31,138,735	224	139,012
Germany	83,251,851	603	138,063
Ecuador	13,183,978	100	131,840
Australia	19,357,594	150	129,051
Chile	15,328,467	120	127,737
Thailand	62,354,402	500	124,709
Ethiopia	67,673,031	550	123,042
Turkey	67,308,928	550	122,380
Guatemala	12,974,361	113	114,817
Spain	40,077,100	350	114,506
Netherlands	15,981,472	150	106,543
Canada	31,902,268	301	105,988
France	59,765,983	577	103,581
Italy	57,715,625	630	91,612
United Kingdom	59,778,002	659	90,710
Poland	38,625,478	460	83,968
Belgium	10,258,762	150	68,392
Bolivia	8,300,463	130	63,850
Czech Republic	10,264,212	200	51,321
Israel	5,938,093	120	49,484
Austria	8,150,835	183	44,540
Portugal	10,066,253	230	43,766
Switzerland	7,283,274	200	36,416
Greece	10,623,835	300	35,413
New Zealand	3,864,129	120	32,201
Denmark	5,352,815	179	29,904
Norway	4,503,440	165	27,294
Hungary	10,106,017	386	26,181
Finland	5,175,783	200	25,879
Sweden	8,875,053	349	25,430
Ireland	3,840,838	166	23,138

1) Population (nations > 20,000,000) is the 2002 estimated population from GeoHive-Global Data-Top 50, or for smaller nations (nations < 20,000,000), from GeoHive-Global Data-All. 2) The number of members (Representatives) in the "Lower House" of each national parliament is taken from the PARLINE Database of the International Organization of Parliaments of Sovereign States (IPU).

[FairWitness]

Lots of reactivity here. If you feel that being one of 650,000 people represented by your representative allows your "voice to be heard", good enough.

[thoughtomator]

Yeah like if 435 of them don't work, 600 would? Sounds like an awful waste of money to pay even more people to be corrupt.

[Salvey]

The size of the Congress has increased from time to time, so I see no good reason not to enlarge it somewhat --not in the thousands, as suggested, but perhaps up to, say, 500. That would surely give the "red" states more clout, and therefore be more reflective of the true political tone of the country.

[ZOOKER]

Goldberg has a point, but I'm not convinced.

The number of constituents per Rep has increased, to the point that they can't give heed to individuals. Write your congressman and chances are you get an automated reply from a PR flack (unless you are Bill Gates or General Motors). Going door to door is impossible, a congressman would never get to see even a fraction of his constituents.

OTOH, I believe in the idea of limited government, and this is definitely not it.

[glorgau]

I can't agree more. The only way to talk to a congressperson these days is either be lucky, or have money. The congress should be like the political conventions of old. Hold sessions in a stadium. 5,000 would be good number to start. To keep costs down they all couldn't all be full time with the staffs that they have now. Perhaps only term limited chairpersons, etc.

[FairWitness]

From the article: All of the ideas for fixing congressional districting call for more and more undemocratic intrusions into the process, particularly by unelected federal judges. Liberals and sympathetic judges want more minority representation. Fine. Most of us want representatives to reflect the values of their communities.

[deport]

But a couple thousand wouldn't be a bad way to start.

---

Yep, another 1565 blowhards to suck up tax dollars and divy up more pork is all that's needed..... Much more efficient and responsive I'm sure....

Heck maybe they should reduce today's number by 1/2 and limit the session days to 180 days.... let them spend some time in their districts with their constituents.....

[Mr. Bird]

I think the concept is sound. Unfortunately, our federal government is now a behemoth that dabbles in nearly every aspect of American life. Introducing more dabblers would likely worsen the problem.

If we could roll back the extra-constitutional meddling and stick to the original premise, a higher number of reps would be outstanding.

[Xthe17th]

Instead of using the arbitrary 600,000 figure, if we simply divide the population of the least populous state (currently Wyoming) into the populations of every other state (and round up or down accordingly), we'd find ourselves with an additional 35 seats in the House of Representatives; Not an unreasonable increase with just about every state gaining one more representative. Also, if you analyze this wrt electoral votes, Bush would still have won 2000 by a narrow margin, so it doesn't favor either major party:

STATE__2000 Census____New #Reps
WY......493,782..........1
DC......572,059..........1
VT......608,827..........1
AK......626,932..........1
ND......642,200..........1
SD......754,844..........2
DE......783,600..........2
MT......902,195..........2
RI......1,048,319........2
HI......1,211,537........2
NH......1,235,786........3
ME......1,274,923........3
ID......1,293,953........3
NE......1,711,263........3
WV......1,808,344........4
NM......1,819,046........4
NV......1,998,257........4
UT......2,233,169........5
AR......2,673,400........5
KS......2,688,418........5
MS......2,844,658........6
IA......2,926,324........6
CT......3,405,565........7
OR......3,421,399........7
OK......3,450,654........7
SC......4,012,012........8
KY......4,041,769........8
CO......4,301,261........9
AL......4,447,100........9
LA......4,468,976........9
MN......4,919,479.......10
AZ......5,130,632.......10
MD......5,296,486.......11
WI......5,363,675.......11
MO......5,595,211.......11
TN......5,689,283.......12
WA......5,894,121.......12
IN......6,080,485.......12
MA......6,349,097.......13
VA......7,078,515.......14
NC......8,049,313.......16
GA......8,186,453.......17
NJ......8,414,350.......17
MI......9,938,444.......20
OH......11,353,140......23
PA......12,281,054......25
IL......12,419,293......25
FL......15,982,378......32
NY......18,976,457......38
TX......20,851,820......42
CA......33,871,648......69
TOTALS: 286,718,392.....570

PS: Get the same result if DC is combined with Maryland (DC-->0, MD-->12) as it should be per retrocession!

[only1percent]

Some small-state Senators would be sure to resist this, as if they didn't gain a Rep from the scheme it would dilute the electoral vote advantage their state enjoys, and if they did gain a Rep from the scheme it would materially increase the Senators' pool of potential opponents.

However, the Senate as a whole might find an expansion of the House quite gratifying. Since, to be politically paletable, an expansion of the House would almost certainly be accompanied by a pro-rata reduction of individual House office budgets, the relative institutional power of an individual Senator, already monumental compared to that of any non-leadership House member, would increase even more.

[djreece]

It's about time this issue is discussed! It's the constitutional thing to do, and I believe freezing the size of Congress was one of the changes that led to the federal government's explosive growth in size and power in the last century.

Having more members of Congress would help address the problems of corruption and campaign finance. The grassroots candidates would be able to compete by going out and meeting voters face to face; thus the incumbents would have to become more responsive to their constituents. By having a larger Congress, we may be able to pare their outrageous salaries and perks to a more reasonable level and maybe even cut down on the amount of time Congress stays in session.

[Looking for Diogenes]

In Los Angeles County, the five Supervisors each represent districts with about 2 million persons. And that is suppose to be local government.

[bvw]

George Washington would have agreed, for the reasons as Goldberg pointed out. The House should be in THOUSANDS of Representatives. That would lessen the number of poffies and table sharks both in it, and make it a better mix for producing Senators and Governors too. Massive enlargment would reduce the shackles the elite throw on it.

[goldstategop]

A House of 1,500 to 2,000 Members would be unwieldy and not evcry one could show up for work in Washington but it would be a lot more representative = fewer people being represented means better services for constituents and you gotta love gridlock. The House if anything, is way too small to effectively serve a country as large and populated as ours is today. Make it bigger and make it part-time. That will cure the syndrome of politicians with too much time on their hands lording it over our lives.