The House of Representatives is too small

For more than a century, the size of the House of Representatives has been frozen at 435 seats; in that same period, the US population has tripled. This means that today, the average representative is responsible for more than 750,000 constituents. Scholars and politicians say this imbalance is why many Americans feel like Congress is disconnected from them. So what if we…added more seats? That’s what Rep. Sean Casten (D-IL) is proposing in a new bill, because he believes it’s closer to what the country’s founders originally envisioned. While expanding Congress could make our ratio of voters to representatives smaller, it also raises a difficult question: Can a larger, more crowded legislature actually govern, or are we just adding more voices to the gridlock? Vox dives into the math, the history, and the potential future of a “bigger” American democracy. Learn more about expanding the House of Representatives: * Why US elections only give you two choices, a Vox video about proportional representation * The Case for Enlarging the House of Representatives, a report from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, co-authored by Lee Drutman, who’s featured in the video * Expanding the House of Representatives, Explained, from Protect Democracy * The text of Rep. Sean Casten’s bill * The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929, US Census Bureau * US population keeps growing, but House of Representatives is same size as in Taft era, Pew Research Center If you enjoy our reporting and want to hear more from Vox journalists, sign up for our Patreon at patreon.com/vox. Each month, our members get access to exclusive videos, livestreams, and chats with our newsroom. Subscribe to Vox’s YouTube channel. This story was supported by a grant from Protect Democracy. Vox had full discretion over the content of this reporting.