I think the bigger issue isn't just structural, it's electoral. But I'm also skeptical of the idea the House is more functionally democratic just because it's swingier and requires constant campaigning.
Replies
Is your argument that the presidency is more functionally democratic than the House at present, and would continue to be even if the latter were made more representative?
sep 4, 2025, 5:13 pm • 1 0 • view
I mean I sure as hell don't get any more say in Congress either way and end up largely subordinate in my own political desires to what other, often more conservative parts of the country say in the exact same way :)
sep 4, 2025, 5:15 pm • 0 0 • view
It’s a very bad system, to be sure. Hence the need for structural changes! I don’t see a persuasive argument against making Congress more representative (the House expanded, gerrymandering banned nationwide, the power of the Senate reduced, etc.) & empowering it vs. just electing a “good” dictator.
sep 4, 2025, 5:23 pm • 2 0 • view
My point is that ultimately a larger Congress wouldn't really affect how much I'm represented one way or the other, I still have a single Congressperson who's likely either outvoted by more conservative areas or swayed by influential leadership.
sep 4, 2025, 5:48 pm • 0 0 • view
Expanding the House would reduce the disproportionate representation of more conservative areas and give electeds fewer constituents to be responsive to As for the issue of influential leadership, such is the nature of parties, but it’s better than a dominant president under the current system
sep 4, 2025, 6:06 pm • 1 0 • view
We should absolutely elect the best people to all positions possible, but it’s impossible to imagine doing that forever. Have to change the rules of the system while you can.
sep 4, 2025, 5:24 pm • 1 0 • view