It could be done as far as expanding the house physically goes. Wrt fund raising... I would argue decreasing the size of districts actually means less money is needed as much of tge electioneering could be done through okd fashioned door to door retail politics instead of via massive expensive media campaigns like you have to do in massive districts with a million or more people. Make tge districts one per 50,000 people, as originally intended, and suddenly regular people will be able to start winning. Also it makes bribery harder as you have to bribe more politicians and with smaller districts reps would feel a lot stronger pull to actually do what the people in their district want them to do.
At a district size of 50,000 you would have 20 reps per million people times 320 million, or 6,400 reps.Getting a group that size to agree on anything would be a fool's errand. Small districts encourage small thinking and most would be lost in the weeds of their local situations. Fewer better thinkers are needed; those who can see the big picture and fold the needs of their district into that picture would be the best reps.
BJ, i hate to cramp your style here, again.
But the point Oerdin makes sort of matters. And with the required premises yours sort of doesn't. Because with small enough districts campaign funds become increasingly irrelevant.
Let me give you some anecdotal evidence:
My country has large electoral districts, comparatively speaking.
I have two residences and (things are complicated but) the district i consider "home" (never mind i had to vote in the other one) has about 220 thousand people in it.
That's large. Most countries have smaller electoral districts.
Anyway, my Dietwoman decided to retire this year. And so as to not roll back progress™ she decided it would be a good idea to bestow her seat to a 34 year old high school teacher who has not held any elected office in her life.
This is her.
This is the start of her campaign, mind you. She is having tea with a local bureaucrat elected by about ten thousand people.
Because that's the way you start a campaign around here.
The place looks largely
like this. People are what has to be considered "absurdly protestant". You may do the math on how much of a damn they give about transgender bathrooms.
So what happened? She got elected. To hold a seat we basically own, since the fall of the Third Empire; in an election where "team us"
was very much not in the business of holding seats.
Never mind what the local Trumpists wrote on her campaign posters.
She still held the seat, by a point, or some such.
Anyway, the point is twofold:
1. Her election cost about a thousand bucks plus volunteerism.
2.
None of the above happens with districts at 800k a pop.
And again: 200k is already pretty damn large. Most countries go way smaller. We are rather stupid like that, never mind what
you are doing.
