Would you support this hypothetical constitutional amendment?

[America needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Anyone who is not a member of the US House who wishes to run for the US House must run in the Congressional District in which they live, or following redistricting, if they were already a declared candidate prior to redistricting, the Congressional District with the greatest overlap to the District they were previously running in.
Anyone who is a member of the US House who wishes to run for the US House must run in either the Congressional District in which they live, the Congressional District in which they represent, or following redistricting, the Congressional District with the greatest overlap to their old District.
This article shall not come into effect until after a cycle of regularly scheduled Congressional Elections completes itself following its ratification.

[Goldwater]

Nah, I don't think carpetbagging is a big enough deal to warrant a constitutional amendment against it

[MarkD]

Nah, I don't think carpetbagging is a big enough deal to warrant a constitutional amendment against it

^^^

[Pericles]

If anything more talented people who live in areas that are safe for the other party should enter political office. Obviously people can move, but personally I find this is a perk of having MPs selected from party lists in a proportional representation system.

[インターネット掲示板ユーザー Punxsutawney Phil]

Nah, I don't think carpetbagging is a big enough deal to warrant a constitutional amendment against it

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Nah, I don't think carpetbagging is a big enough deal to warrant a constitutional amendment against it

In addition to this, it would open us up to so many controversies about what someone's "real residence" is because lots of rich people have multiple homes and because most members of Congress will live in DC a good chunk of the year.

[Averroës]

I place a lot of importance on local ties when I cast my vote. I also view it as a scandal when it becomes clear that a legislator is lying about their local address.

Nor do I see a practical problem with this. Shorter legislative sessions would be good for Congress. Plenty of state governments operate on a regular session of just a few months. Emergency sessions are always an option as they are needed. We would be better off if legislators spent more time in their districts and less time in DC.

Moreover, if a legislator spends enough time at their ski lodge or beach house to place their status in doubt, they're spending too much time away from the district.

With all of that said, this doesn't need to be an amendment.