In polls conducted this month the highest Congressional approval rating topped out at 29%. The YouGov poll from July 21-23 had a 10% approval rating. The highest disapproval rating came in at 80%, with every poll showing at least a 60% disapproval rating. What can be done to improve these numbers?
The Reapportionment Act of 1929 set the permanent size of the House of Representatives at 435 members. Based on the 1920 census that meant one seat for roughly every 241,864 people. After the 1930 Census that number jumped to 280,675. After the 2020 census that number is 761,169. Using the estimated population for today that number is 786,064. If the House of Representatives is truly supposed to be the people’s house it needs to grow in size. One person cannot come close to representing the ideas of 786,064 people. In Delaware it is currently over 1 million people represented by 1 seat.
It is time to double the size of the House of Representatives. The new number should be 871 members, double plus one to prevent ties. Under this approach every state would have at least two Congress members and Deleware would get three. Florida would jump up to 57 seats, Texas would have 77, and California would have 104 seats in a 871 seat House of Representatives.
Adding 436 seats to the House of Representatives would provide new faces to a broken system. Only robust civic engagement can lead to a change in the current version of business as usual. Doubling the size of the House of Representatives would disrupt the way the House is currently functioning. It would present the opportunity for bold new ideas. If nothing else it will require lobbyists to spend more money in attempts to subvert the will of the people. A more representative House of Representatives should be in the interest of all citizens.
William Wilberforce has been called an agitator for his commitment to ending the slave trade. One of his well known speeches on the subject was given on May 12, 1789.
Cardinal Richelieu has been hailed as a great statesman and as a subversive authoritarian. Depending on who you talk to he was a man needed to strengthen the monarchy in France, or he was a tyrant seeking personal power. Next week I will have a book review that may shed more light on Cardinal Richelieu.
When Lenin was working on his major writing projects he would often pace across the room formulating the ideas that he would write down by saying them out loud. Once he had the idea for what he wanted to write he would often repeat the idea to Nadezhda Krupskaya, who would provide feedback. Once this process was complete he would then write the ideas down.
Here is an AI rendering of what that might have looked like when he was drafting What is to be Done.
This month this community will focus on political subversion. What is subversion? When is it justified? What is the interplay between subversion and agitation? These are some of the topics to be discussed this month.
“You get used to the despot’s shortcomings, when they are not great vices, and the change of an autocratic ruler leads to involuntary fear.”
Sergei Trubetskoi
