As a nerd I like this solution, but I think it would face a lot of headwinds. I’m curious if there are constitutional reasons it couldn’t be done.
I think the easiest solution is to greatly increase the size of the House and make it primarily virtual. There should be less mental resistance to this since the pandemic and acceptance of WFH.
I remember 20 years ago when I lived in the Washington DC area, there was a push for DC to be given a representative. The compromise would have been to also give Utah an additional representative, as Utah was just below the cutoff for an additional representative after the previous census. The compromise in theory would have been acceptable to everyone, as the DC representative would have almost certainly been a Democrat and the Utah representative a Republican. DC was also pushing to get two senators.
Perhaps mathematically sound, but the optics would fail. “My vote isn’t worth as much as that guy’s vote!” Cue outrage. People is dumb.
I think the whole system sucks, in that large swaths of the country have reps and senators who have virtually zero say in what gets legislated. How is that democratic?
Why does some asshole from Kentucky, as an example, get to say “fuck you” to tens of millions of people’s goals? “What can we do? They’re in the majority” is both true and disgraceful.
And don’t get me started on how a majority leader can lead a party that represents fewer people than the minority, in the aggregate.
Might be simpler to just give each member as many votes as there are people in their district. We might see a few whips’ heads explode, but…
I think that is a good idea. Seems fair.
The limit on quantization as described in Article I of the Constitution is
The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative;
Changing the allocation of Representatives requires Congress pass a new law. But the logistics of such a large body can be managed by the House adapting its own rules by itself.