Expand the House?

WASHINGTON — In America, democracy follows the simple principle of one person, one vote, right?

Unless, that is, you live in Montana, where your vote carries a little more than half as much weight in the House of Representatives as that of someone living in Rhode Island.Or if you live in Utah, where your vote counts about two-thirds as much as it would in Iowa.

With the 2010 Census around the corner, Washington and the various state capitals will soon turn their attention to carving out congressionaldistricts across the nation. And once again, political leaders are preparing to cobble together a patchwork quilt of districts that will leave some Americans underrepresented.

Redrawing the lines will address some of the population shifts over the last decade, but much of the disparity will remain, because it is built into the system. In theory, every member of the House represents roughly the same number of people. But because each state gets at least one seat, no matter how small its population, and because the overall size of the House has not changed in a century, the number of people represented by a single congressman can vary widely.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/us/politics/18baker.html?_r=2

This article by Nate Silver shows that it would benefit the Democrats and that in 2000 would have given Gore a sizeable electoral college victory. I can't see Republicans agreeing to it.


http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/09/would-bigger-house-favor-democrats.html