Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)California is in danger of losing a House seat after adding 2.3 million people [View all]
https://qz.com/1506891/california-is-in-danger-of-losing-a-house-seat/From 2010 to 2018, the state of California added about 2.3 million people according to new estimates released by the US Census. Its population, already the largest in the US, to close to 39.6 million. And Californias population increase of 6.2% has been greater than the 6.0% increase across the country.
Yet, due to the USs complicated rules for giving states representation in Congress, California might soon lose one of its seats in the House of Representatives. Losing that seat would also mean the loss of a vote in the Electoral College, which determines the winner of presidential elections.
Since 1913, the number of representatives in the lower chamber of Congress has been capped at 435. While each state has two members in the higher chamber of the Senate, the number of its representatives to the House is determined by the size of a states populationthough each state is automatically given one representative. (Populous California has 53 representatives, for example, and Alaska just one.)
Every 10 years, after the US government conducts its comprehensive census, the Houses representatives are reapportioned by state. For most, this doesnt lead to a change. For those that grew much faster or slower than the country as a whole, it can mean gaining or losing power. Fast-growing Texas gained four seats after the 2010 Census as its population exploded. New York lost two seats. On average, after the 2010 Census, a House member represented about 700,000 people.
snip
The number of seats in the House needs to be dramatically increased and more fairly distributed. That is a major fix for the both the Electoral College and the inequity of legislative power in the House itself.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
36 replies, 6276 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (22)
ReplyReply to this post
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
California is in danger of losing a House seat after adding 2.3 million people [View all]
Celerity
Dec 2018
OP
Yes, and one of the ways to gauge the size of the increase in the number of House members is called
Celerity
Dec 2018
#8
I'm just saying if you want to make congress truly representative, you must deep six the Senate
Major Nikon
Dec 2018
#13
you still need both chambers to pass laws, and the Senate doesn't change in size, so that stays the
Celerity
Dec 2018
#15
Actually I do have a fix for the Senate. It is ultra radical and hard to do though.
Celerity
Dec 2018
#14
Why cap the total, and adjust the ratio ? Could easily fix the ratio at say, 1 Rep:1,000,000 voters
eppur_se_muova
Dec 2018
#4
One per million is the opposite direction. That would reduce House size to only 330 or so.
Celerity
Dec 2018
#9
Rhode Island is also facing the same fate, pitting our two solid Dem Reps,
Totally Tunsie
Dec 2018
#25