Post #40818 by sutton on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (12)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 4

why limit it to 435 across multiple swings in partisan ownership of Congress for 113 years?

Not to get all history-nerdy on you, but yes: chamber size, plus politics, plus about the biggest group before being too unwieldy, plus politics:

"From 1800 through 1840, the number of representatives was determined by the ratio of the number of persons each was to represent ("fixed ratio"), although the way to handle fractional remainders changed. Therefore, the number of representatives changed with that ratio, as well as with population growth and the admission of new states.

For the 1850 census and later apportionments, the number of seats was determined prior to the final apportionment ("fixed house size"); and thus, the ratio of persons each was to represent was the result of the calculations. In 1911, the House size was fixed at 433 with provision for the addition of one seat each for Arizona and New Mexico when they became states (U.S. Statutes at Large, 37 Stat 13, 14 (1911)). The House size, 435 members, has been unchanged since, except for a temporary increase to 437 at the time of admission of Alaska and Hawaii as states (following the 1950 census)."

https://www.census.gov/topics/public-sector/congre...

-- sutton
storehouse of useless minutiae since at least LBJ

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (12)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.