Politics Magazine

United States Needs A Bigger House Of Representatives

Posted on the 12 November 2018 by Jobsanger
United States Needs A Bigger House Of Representatives
Does this country need a larger House of Representatives? The editorial board of The New York Times believes we do, and they make a good case for increasing it from 435 to 593 members. I agree with them. Here's what they had to say:
We’re nearly two decades into the 21st century, so why is America still operating with a House of Representatives built for the start of the 20th? The House’s current size — 435 representatives — was set in 1911, when there were fewer than one-third as many people living in the United States as there are now. At the time, each member of Congress represented an average of about 200,000 people. In 2018, that number is almost 750,000. This would shock the Constitution’s framers, who set a baseline of 30,000 constituents per representative and intended for the House to grow along with the population. The possibility that it might not — that Congress would fail to add new seats and that district populations would expand out of control — led James Madison to propose what would have been the original First Amendment: a formula explicitly tying the size of the House to the total number of Americans. The amendment failed, but Congress still expanded the House throughout the first half of the nation’s existence. The House of Representatives had 65 members when it was first seated in 1789, and it grew in every decade but one until 1920, when it became frozen in time. There’s a solution, which involves adding 158 new seats to the House of Representatives, making it proportionally similar to most modern democracies.  . . . The bottom line is that the House today is far too small, and that poses a big danger to American democracy. For starters, how does a single lawmaker stay in touch with the concerns of three-quarters of a million people? The answer is she doesn’t. Research shows that representatives of larger districts are more likely to take political positions at odds with what a majority of their constituents want. These representatives are also ripe targets for lobbyists and special interests, whose money enables them to campaign at scale, often with misleading messages. Special interests are more likely than regular voters to influence policy positions and votes. Second, the cap on the number of House members leads to districts with wildly varying populations. Montana and Wyoming each have one representative, but Montana’s population — 1.05 million — is nearly twice the size of Wyoming’s. Meanwhile, Rhode Island, which has roughly the same population as Montana, gets two seats. These discrepancies violate the basic constitutional principle of one-person-one-vote, causing voters to be unequally represented in the chamber that was designed to offset the Senate, where every state gets two seats regardless of population. Third, the size of the House determines the shape of the Electoral College, because a state’s electoral votes are equal to its congressional delegation. This is one of the many reasons the college is an unfair and antiquated mechanism: States that are already underrepresented in Congress have a weaker voice in choosing the president, again violating the principle that each citizen should have an equal vote. . . . In 1929, Congress passed a law capping the size of the House and shifting responsibility for future reapportionments onto the Commerce Department. That’s why, more than a century later, we find ourselves with a national legislature far too small to fairly represent both the size and diversity of modern America. This warps our politics, it violates basic constitutional principles of political equality, and it’s only getting worse. There’s a simple fix: Make the House bigger. . . . What is the optimal number of House seats? There isn’t a simple answer. In the Federalist No. 55, James Madison wrote, “no political problem is less susceptible of a precise solution.” By the founders’ own standards, the House could now hold nearly 11,000 members. That’s obviously too many to function. What about returning to the average district size of 1911? That would require more than 1,600 members — still probably too big. There’s a better solution, which involves bringing America into line with other mature democracies, where national legislatures naturally conform to a clear pattern: Their size is roughly the cube root of the country’s population. Denmark, for instance, has a population of 5.77 million. The cube root of that is 179, which happens to be the size of the Folketing, Denmark’s parliament. This isn’t some crazy Scandinavian notion. In fact, the House of Representatives adhered fairly well to the so-called cube-root law throughout American history — until 1911. Applying that law to America’s estimated population in 2020 would expand the House to 593 members, after subtracting the 100 members of the Senate. That would mean adding 158 members. To some, this might sound like 158 too many. But it’s an essential first step in making the “People’s House” — and American government broadly — more reflective of American society today.

You Might Also Like :

Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog

These articles might interest you :

  • Opera Review: Going For the Throat

    Opera Review: Going Throat

    Stuart Skelton debuts in Otello. by Paul J. Pelkonen There's been a nasty cold rampaging around New York this month. It struck down your faithful correspondent... Read more

    The 18 December 2018 by   Superconductor
    CULTURE, THEATRE & OPERA
  • Celebrating Sisters with Sisters Wine

    Celebrating Sisters with Wine

    Tis the season for celebration and being with friends and family. To celebrate each other, our relationships and look to a new year.Sisters come in all forms. Read more

    The 18 December 2018 by   Hvwinegoddess
    DRINK, FOOD & DRINK
  • From Phantom Limbs to Charlie Chaplin: Marianne Simmel Papers Open for Research

    From Phantom Limbs Charlie Chaplin: Marianne Simmel Papers Open Research

    contributed by Allan Christopher, Amanda Leach, Sarah Riddle, M. Rose Stull (students in the Museums Archives Certificate Program). Read more

    The 18 December 2018 by   Chp
    HEALTH, HISTORY, PSYCHOLOGY
  • Above the Clouds: Two Sunsets

    Above Clouds: Sunsets

    An amazing sunset taken some 35,000 feet above the earth Read more

    The 18 December 2018 by   Travellingartist
    TRAVEL
  • December 19th - Freebies!

    December 19th Freebies!

    December 19th is... Believe It or Not Day (1918), National Oatmeal Muffin Day, Can't Get Up Day (1985), Space Milestone: First Radio Broadcast from Space (1958)... Read more

    The 18 December 2018 by   Catherine Mcdiarmid-Watt
    FAMILY, FINANCE, SHOPPING
  • From the Rock to the Sandbar

    From Rock Sandbar

    Early morning here as I write this. I'm sipping coffee before getting ready for work, and watching a fox snoop around the property. Read more

    The 18 December 2018 by   Seliharris
    SOCIETY
  • Diet Doctor Podcast #9 — Dr. Ron Krauss

    And he's the director of atherosclerosis research at the Children's Hospital Oakland research Institute, he's a professor of medicine at UCSF, professor of... Read more

    The 18 December 2018 by   Dietdoctor
    DIET & WEIGHT, HEALTH, HEALTHY LIVING, MEDICINE

Magazines