this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2023
125 points (97.0% liked)

politics

18651 readers
3685 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

There have been 435 seats in the House for so long now that it might seem as if the Founding Fathers had foreseen it as a natural ceiling for the chamber’s size. But that isn’t the case: 435 is entirely arbitrary. The House arrived at that number because of political expediency — and it has stayed there because of it, too.

Up until 1910, when the chamber expanded from 391 to 435 seats,4 the size of the House had experienced a mostly unchecked pattern of growth. Only once, after the 1840 census, did the number of seats in the House not increase; 1910, however, marked the last time the House grew, even though the U.S. population has more than tripled since then, from over 90 million in 1910 to over 330 million today.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-the-house-got-stuck-at-435-seats/

It can be changed literally whenever....

So you're saying for 113 years now, there's been a grand conspiracy where everyone in DC has agreed to deny Americans accurate representation?

It's capped because of physical space bud. They could telework these days

*But my point was the space in the Capitol Building is finite, it's not a fucking TARDIS. Not every house rep gets an office in that building

They have offices in an adjoing building.

I feel like I'm explaining to my dog the mailman doesn't show up everyday to steal his food, it's an entirely simple concept. There's not space for all 435 to have an office there.

Pelosi is no longer the most recent ex-speaker.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Wow.

You're linking an entire long and insightful article that precisely explains why the number of representatives was capped and that never once mentions that it was because of physical office space - and yet your takeaway is that it was capped because America ran out of office space for its representatives.

Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It's capped because they ran out of seats in the chamber...

My point is that there's finate space. And they won't add more.

Which is why the vast majority of house reps have their offices in an adjoining building.

Why do you think there's just a bunch of empty offices no one are using in the Capitol Building?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Can you point out where you’re seeing the cap based on space? I read your article and it looks like it was capped due to the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act.

In fact, until the House was capped at 435 seats2 by the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act, each apportionment period was regularly accompanied by clashes over how to best divvy up political power in Congress — including the size of the House.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

It's capped because they ran out of seats in the chamber...

No, it's not.

Why don't you just read the fucking article that you posted? You might learn something.