[Repeal The 17th]

Originally:
representatives were about 2 1/2 times in number as senators (65 vs 26).
Now:
there are 435 representatives vs 100 senators, or about 4 1/2 times in number;
the 2 1/2 to 1 ratio would translate to 250 members in the house of representatives.

Originally:
representatives were 1 per 30,000 in population.
Now:
that would require 10,000 members in the house of representatives.

[GeronL]

Could you imagine 10,000 members of Congress?

All of them with high priced benefits and staff. It’d be insane.

[OneWingedShark]

Originally:
representatives were 1 per 30,000 in population.
Now:
that would require 10,000 members in the house of representatives.

I'm not sure having such a large body would be a bad thing. It would make it easier to hold them to account, as well as making it harder [or at least more expensive] to buy favor.