A larger House of Representatives does not require a bigger building.
A larger House of Representatives does not require a bigger chamber, just a bigger IT solution!
A Substantially Larger House Would Only be More Unwieldy for the Lobbyists.
A substantially larger House, with most of its members working from their home districts, would be far more unwieldy for the lobbyists, but better for everyone else.
Single-Member Versus Multi-Member Congressional Districts — which is better?
The answer is not obvious: While large multi-member districts promise greater ideological diversity, the advantages of small single-member districts are quite significant.
Reduce Federal Spending by Enlarging the House of Representatives
Substantially enlarging the House of Representatives would likely result in a net reduction in federal spending.
AI Analyses Agree on Benefits of Small Congressional Districts
The analyses by Grok and Gemini provide compelling evidence that reducing congressional district sizes to approximately 50,000 residents would transform American democracy for the better.
Restoring representative government will require thousands of Representatives
There is only one way to overcome the cumulative damage of nearly two centuries of representational deprivation: Add thousands of Representatives—just as the founders intended.
The New York Times: America Needs a Bigger House of Representatives
The New York Times Editorial Board and our nation’s founders agree: Too small of a House poses a big danger to our republic
The Wyoming and Cube-Root Rules are ineffectual proposals
The Cube-Root and Wyoming rules are commonly suggested as viable formulas for determining the size of our House of Representatives. However, neither proposal would enlarge the House sufficiently to produce any noticeable benefits.
Most Recent Posts:
