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
In reply to the discussion: California is in danger of losing a House seat after adding 2.3 million people [View all]Celerity
(43,330 posts)24. I could see moving the cap up to 400 or 450
Its at 435 now.
Do you mean increasing it by 400 or 450?
That would be a start.
It isn't just gerrymandering either, there is a serious imbalance in the Electoral College that massively favours the Republicans. That can only be addressed by increasing the size of the House via an Act of Congress. The only other ways almost always involve solutions that will require a Constitutional Amendment (for example doing away with the entire EC itself), and thus will not occur.
Gerrymandering will also be much harder with more districts to map out.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
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