- 15,041
There have been 435 members of the House of Representatives since 1911, almost 100 years.
In 1911 the population of the U.S. was 92 million, about 212,000 people for each member of House. Today the population of the U.S. is 310 million, meaning just over 700,000 people per U.S. representative.
Congress was to be the house that represented the people and the number of congressman was/is to be apportioned based upon population. That is balanced by the Senate, apportioned 2 members per state, regardless of the population of the state.
I don't think the House has too many members. What we should consider doing is cutting the pay of the members of congress and turning it into a part time job. This would require less government involvement in our lives, something conservatives would be delighted with.
As sad as it is to say, I don't think a part-time Congress is possible. Even if it was a goal, it would take a generation or more to wind down government to a level that a part-time legislative branch could handle. Let's remember, our full-time Congress can't even pass a budget until 3 months after the fiscal year starts. Sure, a lot of that is politics, but a lot is just how much has to be overseen.
Also, making Congress part-time gives even more decision making authority to career bureaucrats or political appointees. That further reduces the separation of power. And if you believe that career bureaucrats and political appointees are any less likely to abuse their power than Congress, I've got news for you. They are probably more likely, as influencing one Congressman may increase the odds that a bill will pass or not pass. But if you influence the right bureaucrat, you know exactly what you're going to get.
Finally, when you consider all the breaks that Congress takes, they are probably in Washington only half the time anyway.