After the 1910 Census, the House of Representatives decided to set a limit on membership. 433 members, plus two members for Arizona and New Mexico. They felt that anything larger would make the body inefficient (ha).
But, this has disadvantages. One such disadvantage from the National Atlas:
The average size of a congressional district based on the Census 2000 apportionment population will be 646,952, more than triple the average district size of 193,167 based on the 1900 census apportionment, and about 74,486 more than the average size based on the 1990 census (572,466).
More under the fold, including my estimates on expanding the House
Now, the idea of expanding the house has the natural disadvantage of increasing the number of politicians in Washington, but then again, an expansion may help allieviate bizarre district boundaries and give representatives smaller constituencies than before.
The math for giving out seats is very unique and thankfully, the Green Papers has more on that process.
The formula used to determine the number of House Seats for each State is the Method of Equal Proportions. Each State is automatically assigned one seat to start with (as each State MUST have at least one seat in Congress). First, assign seats 1 thru 50 of 435.
(..)
Equal Proportions are used to determine which states shall receive seats 51 thru 435. Divide each State's population by the square root of n(n-1) where n equals the number of potential seats for a given State. The result is called the Priority Value.
Priority Value = Population ÷ SQRT( ( N×(N-1) ) ); where N = potential seats (2 to 53) for the state
Fun, isn't it?
That process will help to determine how the House will be expanded and more seats will be handed out.
First off, I'll present plan A and plan B (both of which are 2000 Census variants, so expect something different in 2010). Plan A would have seats allocated for Puerto Rico and The District of Columbia. Plan B wouldn't have such seats.
Plan A:
D.C. gets one voting seat (as they should right now)
Puerto Rico gets 7 seats (which is a pretty good deal, considering all they have now is a 'resident commissioner')
1 more seat goes to: Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin
2 more seats go to: Florida, Illinois, and New York
3 more seats go to: California and Texas
(plus, I'd like to give 2 Senators to DC and Puerto Rico)
Plan B-
Remove the 8 DC/PR seats
Give one more seat to: Arkansas, California, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee.
To be honest, it's just one of those unlikely ideas of mine. But I think that the current number of Representatives is no longer adequate. I think it's shuffling deck chairs to stay with the same number, further detaching Representatives from their constituents.
Maybe 475 is too small or too big.
But, that's just a Saturday Idea of mine. Any thoughts?