Re-apportioning the House & electoral college

James Madison, Federalist Paper 55:

"Sixty or seventy men may be more properly trusted with a given degree of power than six or seven. But it does not follow that six or seven hundred would be proportionably a better depositary. And if we carry on the supposition to six or seven thousand, the whole reasoning ought to be reversed. The truth is, that in all cases a certain number at least seems to be necessary to secure the benefits of free consultation and discussion, and to guard against too easy a combination for improper purposes; as, on the other hand, the number ought at most to be kept within a certain limit, in order to avoid the confusion and intemperance of a multitude."

"At the expiration of twenty-five years, according to the computed rate of increase, the number of representatives will amount to two hundred, and of fifty years, to four hundred. This is a number which, I presume, will put an end to all fears arising from the smallness of the body."

 

The house is a large as it needs to be. Almost ineffective now.

Imagine 1000 of those idiots trying to get anything done.

 

Bigger government?

That's a big NO.

 

Have a citizenship question on the census would be far more useful and fair to the citizens of this country.

A true re-apportionment of representatives that more accurately reflects the population could then take place.

 

Maintaining the current number of electors by population means the ones per senator remain a strong balance for small states. A continual increase based on population could eventually nullify the balance effect of those per senator. And besides, congress is unwieldy already.

There is no good reason to change the 1910 overall representative limit, which was more securely fixed in 1945. Population shifts potentially change the distribution after every census, and that serves well enough.

What we really need are term limits everywhere and a way to get rid of corruption, including deep state and big government. It would also be nice to prohibit socialism once and for all, and prosecute traitors (and other enemies) aiding and abetting illegal aliens. Yep, Trump was right. Americans are dreamers too!

 

How true. How about increasing ICE manpower and have them help conduct the census!

 

I agree with Madison who helped design the original Electoral College system.

It would, however, revive a sound idea from James Madison, who helped design the original system. He had proposed a constitutional amendment that would have guaranteed an increase in the size of the House to keep up with population growth. It wasn’t adopted.

The current system disproportionately gives power to small states that are not growing.

 

That's funny. One US House Representative per small state is disproportionately giving them power.

 

The House had 435 desks and so the number was stopped there. I think that Rayburn said that that was enough. The Dems don't want small states to have two Senators so they want to do away with the idea of a constitutional republic and go to technical democracy, which the Founders considered mob rule.

 

I think you're confusing the House with the Senate.

 

So do I.

Not pertinent. Already done long ago. And this lacks the needed ceiling.

No, not "gives." It just doesn't unduly strip them of it. In the wake of illegal aliens, amnesty, chain migration, and anchor babies, the 435 limit is more important than ever.

 

I would think that was true of anyone else, but...

 

Actually, the way you state this makes no sense. The amendment was to adjust its growth rate not increase its size, which was already built in. So instead of the 10,000 members Salty mentioned, we would only have 6,000.

Again, the cap was needed, and added. Any need for that amendment passed long ago. The 435 cap works. We don’t need even more of those career politicians wasting time, spending money, taxing us to death.

 

If the House cap were reduced to only 350, think of the millions of taxpayer $$$ that would be saved, and still allow for the same do-nothing Congress that we are all used to.

 

That's why the right thing to do is to make every district the size of the smallest one. That increases the size of the house but it's more representative.