Ronn!Blankenship wrote: > At 09:09 PM Tuesday 4/26/2005, Robert Seeberger wrote: > >> This would be addressed by returning to the system where every >> representative had an equal number of constituents. We would gain a >> crapload of reps, but then democracy isn't free is it?<G> > > > IIRC, the figure of 8000+ members of the House I mentioned a few > days > ago was based on each representative having the same number of > constituents, and that number being what it was before the total > number of representatives (or something like that: I'm sure of the > first, anyway. Of course, I don't happen to recall a reference . . > . > )
If we used 1780 numbers you would get those kind of numbers. I'm thinking more along the lines of using the smallest populated district as the benchmark, and then you only gain a couple hundred Reps initially. The number of constituents per Rep can change, but any Rep should represent the same number of people as any other Rep. xponent Done Right Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
