Expanded House of Representatives

[Kaine for Senate '18]

If we expanded the House of Representatives so that each district was the size of the smallest state (Wyoming, 532,668 people), the House would expand to 569 members, leading to a 669 member Congress, and a 672 member electoral college.  This would be the map:

Obama: 453
McCain: 219

[Frodo]

Is there room in the current Capitol for 669 members of the House and Senate?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Is there room in the current Capitol for 669 members of the House and Senate?

I think so, yes.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

On this one Website I was on a few years ago there was this guy who suggested Doubling the Size of the House to make the electoral college more representative of the popular vote. He said it would also reduce the size of each district and thus make it more difficult to gerrymander and make the districts less partisan. I didn't think it that feasible though. 

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Yeah, we couldn't double the size of the House.  That would lead to a Congress of 970 people, which is too large.  669 is manageable, though.

[CJK]

How did you calculate this?

I do think the house should be expanded as much as possible.

[Sewer]

71 electoral votes for me.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

The 2004 presidential election, for comparison.

Kerry: 311
Bush: 361

[Kaine for Senate '18]

How did you calculate this?

I used the population data for 2008, and divided each state by 532,688 (Wyoming), and rounded to the nearest whole number.  I then added 2 for Senators, and there you have it.

[Vepres]

How did you calculate this?

I do think the house should be expanded as much as possible.

Why is the house 435 members, because there's NO ROOM FOR ANY MORE!!!!!!!! Besides, how do you manage nearly 1000 egos.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Besides, how do you manage nearly 1000 egos.

Only 669   Besides, more House members means fewer career politicians.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Based on the 2008 population estimate, I favor a House of 672 members (cube root of the population) The cube root is a good compromise between small district size and small house.

Applying that same formula to the States, their lower houses would range in size from 81 in Wyoming (6,576 people per legislator) and California with 332 (110,713 people per legislator).

If you use a power of .311 you get 435 members for HoR and using the same power for the states would get you between a range of 60 members for Wyoming to 225 for California.

[Sewer]

Do a map of 2000.

[muon2]

I've asked the folks at the US Capitol about the size limitations when I was touring a couple years ago. They said that the House chamber could easily hold over 600 members. They have members of the House, Senate and other guests on the floor for the State of the Union and all fit.

[aaaa2222]

An expanded house better represents the will of the people. I would love for the house to be expanded further.

[minionofmidas]

700,000 people per constituency rather renders all the legit arguments in favor of single-member districts void.

[CJK]

How did you calculate this?

I used the population data for 2008, and divided each state by 532,688 (Wyoming), and rounded to the nearest whole number.  I then added 2 for Senators, and there you have it.

I'm wondering if it would be the same if you used the formula that is actually used to determine house allocation.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

How did you calculate this?

I used the population data for 2008, and divided each state by 532,688 (Wyoming), and rounded to the nearest whole number.  I then added 2 for Senators, and there you have it.

I'm wondering if it would be the same if you used the formula that is actually used to determine house allocation.

I think Deeds for Gov gave DC a Representative by accident.

Anyway for 568 Representatives plus 1 delegate for DC I get basically the same map except Maine and New Hampshire gain a Representative each while New York and Texas lose a Representative each.

If you use the same target divisor, the population of the smallest state, with Huntington-Hill (the current U.S. method) as Deeds did with Webster, you have 571 Representatives, with Texas getting the 569^th Representative, New York the 570^th, and Ohio the 571^st.

[Stranger in a strange land]

How did you calculate this?

I used the population data for 2008, and divided each state by 532,688 (Wyoming), and rounded to the nearest whole number.  I then added 2 for Senators, and there you have it.

I'm wondering if it would be the same if you used the formula that is actually used to determine house allocation.

You would have to 1) be a statistics major and 2) have an essentially unlimited amount of time to do that, so I'm guessing he didn't, for which I don't blame him at all.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

How did you calculate this?

I used the population data for 2008, and divided each state by 532,688 (Wyoming), and rounded to the nearest whole number.  I then added 2 for Senators, and there you have it.

I'm wondering if it would be the same if you used the formula that is actually used to determine house allocation.

You would have to 1) be a statistics major and 2) have an essentially unlimited amount of time to do that, so I'm guessing he didn't, for which I don't blame him at all.

Took me about 15 minutes with a spreadsheet to do it, and I'm no statistics major.

[Stranger in a strange land]

How did you calculate this?

I used the population data for 2008, and divided each state by 532,688 (Wyoming), and rounded to the nearest whole number.  I then added 2 for Senators, and there you have it.

I'm wondering if it would be the same if you used the formula that is actually used to determine house allocation.

You would have to 1) be a statistics major and 2) have an essentially unlimited amount of time to do that, so I'm guessing he didn't, for which I don't blame him at all.

Took me about 15 minutes with a spreadsheet to do it, and I'm no statistics major.

ah, I had overlooked the miracle that is "excel"

[Vepres]

In my opinion, it would simply make the house slower and less efficient.

[12th Doctor]

Do a map of 2000.

Yeah, because nine ******* years later you people still can't get over that.

[Padfoot]

Do a map of 2000.

Yeah, because nine ******* years later you people still can't get over that.

Imagine if Ted Kennedy had half of his brain removed and then lost the popular vote to John McCain in 2000, but Kennedy still gets to be president from 2001-2009 and perhaps you'll understand why.

The Bush administration was an unmitigated disaster that bears nearly full responsibility for the domestic and international mess we're in.  If anything, Gore supporters have more right to be pissed now than they did when the election Supreme Court decision occurred.

As for the question at hand about expanding the House, I'm definitely in favor of it.  Montana, with nearly 1 million people should have at least 2 representatives in the House.  I also think that any state whose delegation constitutes more than 10% of the total House membership should be strongly encouraged to split into multiple states.

[Sewer]

Do a map of 2000.

Yeah, because nine ******* years later you people still can't get over that.

...What?