Here’s an idea to reduce the outsized influence of small states on the Electoral College from @UTexasLaw professor @steve_vladeck — increase the size of the House of Representatives.
One way the 1787 Constitutional Conventuon established its legitimacy was through George Washington’s attendance. Delegates immediately named Washington the Convention’s presiding officer; he mostly listened attentively to its proceedings, offering only one amendment.
This was at the very end, a change to Article I, Sec. 2. The draft Constitution has called for no more than one Representative for every 40,000 people. Washington asked this be changed to one for every 30,000, a change that would, he thought, make the House more reflective...
...of the country. Now, by proposing a sensible but minor amendment, Washington was signaling his approval of the Constitution as a whole. This was essential to its ultimate ratification. But this story also demonstrates that the goal of a more representative House...
....has the most distinguished pedigree imaginable. @steve_vladeck advocates increasing the number of Representatives to dilute the influence of the two electoral votes granted to even the smallest states in Presidential elections by virtue of their having two Senators.
I think of it more as a means to flush out some of the deadwood that burdens the House now: representatives who serve only their donors, or who must depend on staff just to function. Either way, it’s an idea worth serious consideration.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
