Aug 17, 2022·edited Aug 17, 2022Liked by Jeff Mayhugh
Very good approach to "uncapping." I like the number of expanded seats you propose, but wonder if it is beyond the pale of public opinion. That is why in my posts on FB I have often included the Wikipedia link to "The Wyoming Rule" proposal, that justifies expansion of House seats by 138.
When a Republican controlled Congress wrote its' version of the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act, they used the 1910 census as their guide. The 1920 census was too "messy" for them because the 1920 numbers reflected a significant shift between rural and urban places (showing dramatic changes brought by the "great migration" during and following World War One). . . Republicans wanted nothing to do with the new dominant urban population reality. .
. . There were 121 million people in the country when the Apportionment Act was signed by Herbert Hoover. We have 333 million people now. California gained one million people between 2010 and 2020, yet they lost one Congressional seat. The "Wyoming Rule" plan gives the state 17 more seats instead. . . Texas plays out in a similar fashion, only gaining 2 seats when a dozen should be added.
. . . Uncapping by 138 seats places a manageable number of people in each Congressional district. . . Currently we have an average of 760,000 people in each. . . . Even the American Enterprise Institute supports the effort to expand the number of house seats. It points out that when Congressional staff time is dominated by answering citizen inquiries, it takes staff away from legislative matters at hand. It creates a sort of intellectual vacuum. When there is less and less Congressional staff time devoted to crafting legislation, guess where the help comes from? . . . LOBBYISTS on Capitol Hill are more than happy to fill the void. . . .
. . . Anyone who says a larger Congress would be unwieldy is either misinformed, or they are just too comfortable with the status quo. . . . We have been living with a Congress that operates as if it is still 1929. The late Congressman Alcee Hastings introduced H.R. 996 in 2021 to have Congress study the workings of Congress, including its' size, so recommendations could be made to improve Congressional operations. . . H.R. 996 had just four co-sponsors. No one has picked-up the gauntlet. Any voting rights reform bill brought before Congress should include the "Wyoming Rule" plan, or something else which expands the number of seats in "the people's house." It would also increase the number of electors in the Electoral College, bringing that ancient institution into the 21st Century.
. . . We cannot continue as a democracy/republic by still living in 1929.
Very good approach to "uncapping." I like the number of expanded seats you propose, but wonder if it is beyond the pale of public opinion. That is why in my posts on FB I have often included the Wikipedia link to "The Wyoming Rule" proposal, that justifies expansion of House seats by 138.
When a Republican controlled Congress wrote its' version of the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act, they used the 1910 census as their guide. The 1920 census was too "messy" for them because the 1920 numbers reflected a significant shift between rural and urban places (showing dramatic changes brought by the "great migration" during and following World War One). . . Republicans wanted nothing to do with the new dominant urban population reality. .
. . There were 121 million people in the country when the Apportionment Act was signed by Herbert Hoover. We have 333 million people now. California gained one million people between 2010 and 2020, yet they lost one Congressional seat. The "Wyoming Rule" plan gives the state 17 more seats instead. . . Texas plays out in a similar fashion, only gaining 2 seats when a dozen should be added.
. . . Uncapping by 138 seats places a manageable number of people in each Congressional district. . . Currently we have an average of 760,000 people in each. . . . Even the American Enterprise Institute supports the effort to expand the number of house seats. It points out that when Congressional staff time is dominated by answering citizen inquiries, it takes staff away from legislative matters at hand. It creates a sort of intellectual vacuum. When there is less and less Congressional staff time devoted to crafting legislation, guess where the help comes from? . . . LOBBYISTS on Capitol Hill are more than happy to fill the void. . . .
. . . Anyone who says a larger Congress would be unwieldy is either misinformed, or they are just too comfortable with the status quo. . . . We have been living with a Congress that operates as if it is still 1929. The late Congressman Alcee Hastings introduced H.R. 996 in 2021 to have Congress study the workings of Congress, including its' size, so recommendations could be made to improve Congressional operations. . . H.R. 996 had just four co-sponsors. No one has picked-up the gauntlet. Any voting rights reform bill brought before Congress should include the "Wyoming Rule" plan, or something else which expands the number of seats in "the people's house." It would also increase the number of electors in the Electoral College, bringing that ancient institution into the 21st Century.
. . . We cannot continue as a democracy/republic by still living in 1929.