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)

Celerity

(43,398 posts)
Tue Dec 25, 2018, 12:01 PM Dec 2018

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 California’s population increase of 6.2% has been greater than the 6.0% increase across the country.

Yet, due to the US’s 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 state’s population—though 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 House’s representatives are reapportioned by state. For most, this doesn’t 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.
36 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Don't count on the repugs to want changes bitterross Dec 2018 #1
The next time we control both the House and the Senate, as well as Celerity Dec 2018 #3
Here's another factoid Major Nikon Dec 2018 #2
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
We also need to do away with the Senate Major Nikon Dec 2018 #10
I have no answer on how to fix the Senate (I asssume you are joking Celerity Dec 2018 #11
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
I don't think your right about US Parliament Bucky Dec 2018 #18
UK Parliament, including House of Lords. 650 is House of Commons only Celerity Dec 2018 #21
Ah. Of course the Lords don't really work like a senate Bucky Dec 2018 #22
They still do have some legislative power Celerity Dec 2018 #23
Just to clarify.... clementine613 Dec 2018 #29
yes, so sorry to not be more clear!! I should have said 92 IN THE HOUSE Celerity Dec 2018 #30
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
You make a great suggestion. bitterross Dec 2018 #6
Because of the smaller states... Wounded Bear Dec 2018 #7
Just ensure every state gets at least one house seat dansolo Dec 2018 #12
Well, WB, I'm not sure it has to be exact ProudLib72 Dec 2018 #28
I did say round up ... eppur_se_muova Dec 2018 #33
One per million is the opposite direction. That would reduce House size to only 330 or so. Celerity Dec 2018 #9
Agreed! ProudLib72 Dec 2018 #27
IF this happens DFW Dec 2018 #5
It's done via a mathematical formula. clementine613 Dec 2018 #16
The size of Congress Freddie Dec 2018 #17
I'm not sure about your timeline Bucky Dec 2018 #20
Alexander Hamilton: "Even 1000 Socrates would still be a mob" Bucky Dec 2018 #19
I could see moving the cap up to 400 or 450 Celerity Dec 2018 #24
Yeah, I got the numbers wrong. I mean increasing by a 100 or so Bucky Dec 2018 #34
Rhode Island is also facing the same fate, pitting our two solid Dem Reps, Totally Tunsie Dec 2018 #25
Oh wow, you are going to lose a seat?! Celerity Dec 2018 #26
It's highly likely, with Arizona benefitting from our loss. Totally Tunsie Dec 2018 #31
If we were not moving back to London, Providence is deffo Celerity Dec 2018 #32
So, lower income out of staters are undesireable, higher income only MichMan Dec 2018 #35
NY, NJ and New England should become provinces of Canada. roamer65 Dec 2018 #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»California is in danger o...