Why is there no movement to expand the size of the House?

[Ciggies and coffee]

The House of Representatives has had its membership number set at 435 for almost 100 years.

Our population has more than tripled since that time. Hell, we are close to hitting the 300 M line. Why in the hell are we still being
represented by 435 people today folks?

Going a little bit further, correct me if I am wrong, the Constitution limits allows one representative for each 30 thousand people. That's between 9000 and 10000 representatives everyone!

Call me drunk, but we should INCREASE THE HOUSE x 10 TO 4350 REPRESENTATIVES.

A voter's voice would be ten times as loud as it is now.

Big moneyed interests, or any centralized organization, would find it much harder to influence a greater number of seats, and less campaign expenses would be needed in smaller districts.

This has the added benefit of making the electoral college fairer as well.

As for costs, it would amount to peanuts in the total budget.

How about it?

[trotsky]

1. You list the very reason it hasn't happened.

Big moneyed interests, or any centralized organization, would find it much harder to influence a greater number of seats

[Bill McBlueState]

2. interesting...

It's never going to happen, since rich people have a strong interest in keeping down the number of representatives they have to buy off, and rich people always get their way.

But we definitely have technology we didn't have 100 years ago to make this feasible.

[MrPrax]

3. That's a problem as well as...

the reverse problem of allowing overrepresentation in the Senate: Three states with nearly half the population and only 6 Senators...how many 'flyover' states with zilch population, but an abundance of senators with a steady line of lobbyists and committee clout.

Kinda corrupt...

[Neil Lisst]

4. To do so would erode the power of small states.

and that is why it won't be done. Also, those tend to help pubs, who are in power and like it just fine.

[Inland]

5. It's unmangeable to be any larger.

Once any decision making body becomes a certain size, a single voice becomes irrelevant. Already the House operates by caucus and parties. More reps wouldn't change anything. Indeed, fewer wouldn't change anything. I think the lack of representation comes from districting, not size. Instead of being in a large republican drawn district, I would be in a small one.