Make the house be set at 1,000.
...Or just keep increasing the size at each Census like was supposed to happen. Setting the House at 1,000 would cause the same problems of a lack of individual representation half a century from now.
I can't imagine how such an enormous body could function. Would it really be plausible to have a House so large? I'm definitely an advocate for increasing the House to 499 or 501 (to prevent a tie) but 1,000 just seems like way to many people to be effective.
Britain's House of Commons has 646 members (it was 653 until the 2005 reorganization in Scotland that made Scottish constituencies equal to English ones and will be 654 after the next election), and the House of Lords is even larger. They never have a problem functioning.
Your numbers are wrong.
(Was 659, will be 650. Is 646 is correct.)
