It wouldn’t though. It would be reapportioned. It’s locked at 435 due to the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act. You’ll note that 1929 precedes the introduction of both Alaska and Hawaii as states.
The house being locked to that number diminishes the legislative (and electoral college) power of larger states (which is infuriatingly by-design).
Just one state? With 40 million people? Okay, enjoy the House of Representatives massively ballooning.
The house needs to balloon massively anyway. The numbers are way under where they have been historically for representatives per capita.
The US has one of the worst ratios of representatives in their legislature per capita in the world, no less.
Yeah, but not all from one state.
California is around 40M already, so this wouldn’t be the most moronic aspect of this idea
That’s about the same population as California actually.
It wouldn’t though. It would be reapportioned. It’s locked at 435 due to the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act. You’ll note that 1929 precedes the introduction of both Alaska and Hawaii as states.
The house being locked to that number diminishes the legislative (and electoral college) power of larger states (which is infuriatingly by-design).
Prob just a territory, really. Can’t be ruining our perfectly even 100 Senators.
All of the apartheid, none of the citizenship!
Can’t wait to be called a dirty snowback in my own city by my American masters!