It& #39;s not insane. I would be OK with a slightly larger House, but anything beyond, say, 550 gets extremely unwieldy if you want it to really be an active, transformative legislature. As the population grows, people/seat is going up, end of story. https://twitter.com/AriBerman/status/1386765725365325827">https://twitter.com/AriBerman...

Besides: I& #39;m extremely skeptical there& #39;s much of a difference for most citizens once you get beyond....100K? 50K? In either direction: I doubt most people would perceive a difference, and I doubt interests are so narrow & defined that a Member& #39;s job would be much different.

So while I don& #39;t think a somewhat larger House *couldn& #39;t* function, I& #39;m not sure that going to 485 or 525 or whatever would have any actual benefits, and I think it would make the problems of centralization even worse than they already are.