233
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2023
233 points (97.9% liked)
politics
19097 readers
1711 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I often think House seats should be smaller, there used to be 33k people per district, now it's over 700k.
But fewer people per district would make for some idiosyncrasies and guys like this make me think we have enough weirdos in the House as is.
A sizable reason for the current state of eccentric weirdos in the House is the Gerrymandering happening all over the place. Makes it way easier to win based on notoriety and the letter next to your name alone.
Op’s solution would fix that
It can help. But smaller districts can still be gerrymandered.
It's harder and less effective with more districts, however.
Fair enough, but there would be vanishing small returns because math.
I think it would balance out because those idiots might be more numerous, but they would have less power. So maybe a few Representatives would be looney, but they wouldn't be able to get much done against the even larger ranks of sane members.
Well, you’d hope
and then you discover... all the other loonies that get elected, too.
I agree, but we'd have to restructure how the House does business.
The current count of Representatives is 435. If we were to go back to old ratios at 30k, we'd have 11,300 Representatives.
We'd have to break it up into smaller, constituent houses, or something.
Too many people to bribe
If we went back to 210k people per Rep it's about 1555. 210k is the ratio last time apportionment was done in 1912 or something like that.
The math isn't the point though. Republicans won't budge regardless because any increase damages their inherent advantage.
Conservatives should love this, as it's part of the Original plan right?
Uncap the house. More reps = less power per rep.
I will ALWAYS err on the side of diluting power. Always, All ways.