While I understand the reasoning behind this bill, my biggest worry is that independents and candidates from minor parties will suffer as party machines work harder to make sure their people get in first. Having a larger chamber can invite more diversity of ideas, and we aren't in an abysmal state of activity compared to what we've experienced before. With all that said, I'm leaning towards opposing this.
This is an important point. The lower number of House members, means the likely quota for a given election will increase.
We have averaged a quota of 12, with 13 once or twice under nine members. Seven members would raise that quota for the same turnout (say 120), from 13 to 16. That may not seem like a lot but that could make or break someone's ability to win. It won't just affect independents, but progressives and conservatives, to the benefit of establishment centrists. I pointed this irony out in the last campaign, with all the talk of "echo chamber consensus", reducing or eliminating the House actually worsens that.
