Why 435?
I’ve been thinking, I do that a lot. Who am I? I am not a politician, although I did run for office. I write a political Substack but I am not a journalist. I am a political theorist. What is political theory vs politics? To put it simply, political theory is about balancing power and politics is the mechanism in which power is grasped and obtained. While a political theorist focuses on balancing power, a politician focuses on grasping it, I found myself in the strange situation of having to be a little bit of both. I did it because my study of political theory led me to discover that our political institutions are dangerously corrupted. It’s not that all the people in government are corrupt, they aren’t, it’s that the environment is corrupt. Our founders studied the Roman Republic and realized that as it grew larger and the representation remained the same, the lack of representation led to corruption, it’s exactly what they tried to prevent when they wrote our constitution. They believed that small power groups leading large populations were ripe to be corrupted. They created a system that balanced power out enough so it could not be corrupted and controlled. Unfortunately, politicians have spent over 100 years pulling the mechanisms of power in their direction and now we have a system that is dangerously off balance and controlled by a small group of people. It’s time we start to listen to our founders again, we stopped when we stopped reading, from what I can tell this started in the 80s, and now we have a generation of leaders who don’t understand the purpose or structure of government.
What is the purpose of our government and how does its structure make it successful? To answer this, I would like to quote Madison in a letter to Thomas Jefferson from 1787, ten days before the Constitutional Convention adjourned.
“In all civilized Societies, distinctions are various and unavoidable. A distinction of property results from that very protection which a free Government gives to unequal faculties of acquiring it. There will be rich and poor; creditors and debtors; a landed interest, a monied interest, a mercantile interest, a manufacturing interest. These classes may again be subdivided according to the different productions of different situations & soils, & according to different branches of commerce, and of manufactures. In addition to these natural distinctions, artificial ones will be founded on accidental differences in political, religious or other opinions, or an attachment to the persons of leading individuals. However erroneous or ridiculous these grounds of dissention and faction, may appear to the enlightened Statesman, or the benevolent philosopher, the bulk of mankind who are neither Statesmen nor Philosophers, will continue to view them in a different light. It remains then to be enquired whether a majority having any common interest, or feeling any common passion, will find sufficient motives to restrain them from oppressing the minority.”
Madison designed a government to balance the different interests and factions both purposeful and accidental and he did this by creating a republic large enough to house them, and safeguards to prevent any one of them from gaining control. He split power, not into two, but three. In previous republics, power which is derived from the people was divided into state and federal authority, Madison added a third. Allow me to share another quote from his letter to Jefferson.
“In the American Constitution The general authority will be derived entirely from the subordinate authorities. The Senate will represent the States in their political capacity; the other House will represent the people of the States in their individual capac[it]y. The former will be accountable to their constituents at moderate, the latter at short periods. The President also derives his appointment from the States and is periodically accountable to them.”
This structure understands that power is also responsibility, it splits power to allow for one group to focus on the problems of tomorrow while another works on the problems of today. It allows the Senate to focus on the state rather than both the state and the people, and creating the House helps spread the power and responsibility of running a government out to the people. This allows them to have a greater say in their individual liberty and helps ensure they cannot be oppressed. The structure of our government while in the beginning was oppressive by enabling the slaveholders, also allowed the opportunity for a people to free themselves with help of their fellow man. Our governmental structure survives because it is adaptable. As Darwin said:
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change.”
Now that we understand the purpose of our government, let’s try and understand how it accomplishes its goal. Dividing the power allows for better communication between authority and subordinates. Monarchies struggle when the empire grows too large, this makes it difficult for the person with power, the King, to hear his subjects. Our enlarged Republic acts like a funnel, it catches the people’s voice and funnels power up to the executive.
The key is the funnel needs to be large enough to catch the citizen’s voice. Quoting again from the letter to Jefferson “…that this form of Government, in order to effect its purposes, must operate not within a small but an extensive sphere.” How does it work? If the republic is large, it breaks down the House districts small enough to allow the people who want to be heard an opportunity to speak and those who want to stay informed an opportunity to do so. The House Representative is both the citizens’ voice and power. Their job is to listen to the citizens and funnel up anything of value and inform them of what is happening on a federal level and explain why.
Unfortunately, in 1911 our House arbitrarily capped the representation at 435. Since then, our population has grown but the representation has remained the same. In 1911 our citizen-to-representative ratio was 1:220k, by 1970 it was 1:500k, and now it’s 1:756k. The congressional representative now has triple the amount of people to listen to and inform and holds triple the amount of power. This is a problem.
The biggest debate during the constitution was the debate about representation. Madison opened Federalist 55 with this.
“The number of which the House of Representatives is to consist, forms another, and a very interesting point of view under which this branch of the federal legislature may be contemplated. Scarce any article indeed in the whole constitution seems to be rendered more worthy of attention, by the weight of character and the apparent force of argument, with which it has been assailed.”
What were the charges brought against it? He continues…
“The charges exhibited against it are, first, that so small a number of representatives will be an unsafe depositary of the public interests; secondly, that they will not possess a proper knowledge of the local circumstances of their numerous constituents; thirdly, that they will be taken from that class of citizens which will sympathize least with the feelings of the mass of the people, and be most likely to aim at a permanent elevation of the few on the depression of the many; fourthly, that defective as the number will be in the first instance, it will be more and more disproportionate, by the increase of the people, and the obstacles which will prevent a correspondent increase of the representatives.”
Read the first and last charge and then look back at the chart above. So, if 435 isn’t the right number, what is? I contend the correct number is 870. It brings the citizen-to-representative ratio down to 1:400k, this along with modern technology will allow the representative to hear those they represent again. It also spreads the power and responsibility out to 435 additional people in the country. Since 1911 the Federal government has grown the administrative state through the New deal, WWII, the Cold War, and 9/11, but the people’s ability to oversee and check the agencies divested with power has remained the same. Concentrated Power will corrupt a sinful soul and crush a virtuous one. The sinful government employees and representatives are thriving in the corrupt environment and the virtuous ones are overworked and giving up.
I ask when contemplating my ideas to take the partisan hat off, understanding that the current system is so small doesn’t allow for the power of the people to be subdivided into three but only two. Prior to the capping of the house, America had a competitive party system since then power has been consolidated into two strong parties. If a new party with new ideas tries to move in with the Democrats and Republicans, they are moving into a one-bedroom loft, where the tenants share a bed.
I understand that my ideas do not directly help with many of the problems most Americans face today, but creating a more balanced virtuous political environment is key to securing our children’s safety, liberty, and opportunity. It’s also key to having civil discourse so we can solve the most complex problems of our generation. Since joining the ranks of politics, I have consistently been challenged by those with and near power. Here are the most common.
1. “It’s always been that way” to which I respond, “no, it hasn’t.”
2. “You have to do it this way” to which I respond, “why”
3. “Your ideas don’t matter, winning does” to which I respond, “It’s not a game.”
The first two tell me the person is a virtuous soul who is overworked and misinformed. The third one tells me the person is a sinful or corrupted soul who doesn’t want to relinquish power. I have a theory about life I share with the people closest to me, I believe 2 out of every 3 people are good, and I determine who is good and who isn’t, not solely by their actions but by both their intent and actions. If a person wants to be good and is trying to be good then they are in my book. As Madison said in Federalist 51. “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.”
Before I sat down to write this, I caught my 5-year-old daughter Sadie carrying a chair along with toys under her arms and chin down the stairs. I spoke to her and asked her not to do that, explaining that it was dangerous. She began to get upset and blamed her twin sister Ellie. She said, “I asked Ellie for help, but she said no.” So, in her mind, she had thought the problem through and was left with no other alternatives. It was either have someone help her with the responsibility or do it all at once, she never contemplated making two trips. She is a child so I guided her on what to do next time and forgave her. But it’s that kind of short-term binary thinking from our past and current political leadership that has led us to this breaking point in our society, it’s time to open our minds and start to think critically and rationally about what and who we want to be. It’s time to think about our children’s future. Ask your congressman #why435?