Even 300k or perhaps 250k would be a better metric (giving Wyoming two house seats) That would put the house at 1133-1360 representatives Even then, we are talking about one person “representing” hundreds of thousands of individuals, without counting for corruption and personal agendas
My number is 100k per house rep. Mostly for simplicity, and because even I submit that we probably shouldn’t have more than 3,400 members in a governing body. But I believe in direct democracy, and will always push for more power to individual voters, not corrupt able representatives
Everyone should want this. Do you know 781k people? Is that a community to you? That’s how many (on average) you currently share a representative with. Rural and urban communities would both get better representation, wouldn’t have to find fake compromise™️ candidates who end up doing nothing
Defenders of the existing order, including the Senate (which should be abolished) will always invoke the endless quest for consensus here. Are we getting consensus now? Consensus of the ruling/business/upper class, surely. Meanwhile, everyone else isn’t being served.
Making the House of Representatives work for us again will require a few things, including campaign finance reform and other regulations against corruption. Period. The only way, however, to be able to enforce any of it, created a culture of accountability, is with recall power given to voters.
As Marx argued: pay government representatives no more than a working man’s salary and give the people the ability to recall them at any time, and the opportunists will weed themselves out, without the ability to take advantage of the position. Reduce public service to boring administrative tasks.
A larger body would reduce the level of celebrity attained, as well. The superiority mindset of Senators is most obvious, but is also very apparent in “very safe” house districts. These types never actually have to try or be held accountable, just get the party’s support.