Is It Reasonable To Keep The House at 435 Members? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2024, 10:14:12 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Is It Reasonable To Keep The House at 435 Members? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: ...
#1
Yes		  
#2
No		  
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results
Total Voters: 39

Author Topic: Is It Reasonable To Keep The House at 435 Members?  (Read 3965 times)
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW
« on: December 27, 2010, 02:10:06 PM »
Quote from: Verily on December 27, 2010, 12:35:36 AM
Yeah, really. We need at least a thousand members of the House to get reasonable and adequate representation. And no, I'm not joking. I'd want around 3,000 members. 1 per 100,000 people seems reasonable to me (and is what the relatively far more functional FPTP systems in Britain and Canada use, vaguely).

I've never seen an example of a cohesive legislature with more than about 800 members.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 14 queries.