Should the House of Representatives be increased in size?

[AggregateDemand]

Are you people insane? We already have enough Congressmen.

You can't stop death wish. Let it work it's magic. We will secede.

[AggregateDemand]

I still don't understand the argument for expansion. The federal government is not supposed to be pondering local matters. We have local government for local matters.

Expanding the House merely guarantees gridlock and increases corruption, while usurping the power of local governments with an tacit statement of federal authority over local issues. The Hosue balances the Senate and the Senate balances the House. Balance is the purpose of bicameral legislative branch, and balance should determine the number of members.

[AggregateDemand]

That makes no sense. Why set it at 435 then? Wouldn't 400 be better by your logic? Wouldn't 300?

Yes, within reason. If it reached 100 members, it would serve virtually no purpose. We don't need 1,000 members to balance the territorial sovereignty inherent to the Senate model of representation.

[AggregateDemand]

A reduction in House membership would make gerrymandering more difficult. But lobbying a lot easier.

Give and take.

True, but lobbying is an innocuous pastime compared to gerrymandering, which is nothing more than a conspiracy to make sure people are not represented. Lobbying is just paying to get better treatment, which doesn't necessarily harm society.