Jump to content
The Political Lounge

The House of Representatives must change, how would you vote?


Preferred House Type?  

19 members have voted

  1. 1. How would you change the House?

    • Keep as it is now.
      7
    • State at large proportional representation by vote
      7
    • National proportional representation
      4
    • Wyoming Rule
      1

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 05/24/2022 at 06:00 PM

Recommended Posts

The Representative has lost its role as the person who sits and advocates for a specific district. All politics is now national, and should be reflected as such. When you have congressional candidates in North Carolina and Pennsylvania calling for increased border control, it's pretty clear the focus on the district is lost.

NPR would still require party lists to include reps from every state, and opening it up to a national vote would encourage participation of national 3rd parties.  Ideally the 2 big tents splinter and are forced to negotiate and *gasp* compromise. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, I'm not sure I'm enthused about the Wyoming Rule, but I think the arbitrary 435 cap has led to the average representative having to answer to a constituency too large to have a cohesive community interest. The average Representative answers to about 750,000 people when it used to be around 200,000 when the 435 cap was enacted. It's not surprising to me that congressional candidates default to bigger issues that might not directly touch all 750k people but that they mostly have opinions about one way or the other. Not sure that the Wyoming Rule is the best answer per se, but it is the one that best addresses what I find to be a significant issue with the House as it stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, pilight said:

The average representative represents about as many people as the mayor of Indianapolis.  That's not too much for one person.

Didn't say it was logistically too much to handle for one person, and there are countless reasons comparing the job of a mayor to that of a US Representative misses the point, but more than anything else, the Founders when creating the House meant for it to be the most directly democratic part of our government and designed for the House to grow in size as the population grew. Why that would stop being true in 1913 simply is not compelling to me, especially when the number of constituents each Representative answers to has almost tripled in size with no sign of slowing. 


Here's a piece from the American Enterprise Institute laying out more reasons in more detail why the House should be expanded.

https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/the-case-for-enlarging-the-house-of-representatives/

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...