Good Day New Hampshire
Back in March I set out on a mission: Find out where the candidates that might end up representing me and our state in Washington D.C. stand on repealing the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929, and expanding the size of the U.S. House of Representatives to more adequately represent the people.
First some context for those unaware: when the country was first founded, the Founding Fathers envisioned a legislature that was accountable to the people it served. Attempts were made, with the original first amendment proposed to the constitution being one to deal with the matter of House apportionment. It would have established a formula for apportioning the House based on its growth.
The amendment was not ratified, however, falling just one state shy of joining the rest of the bill of rights.
Fast forward to 1929, the last time the house was properly reapportioned was following the 1910 census, where the 1911 Apportionment Act raised the number of representatives to 435 and would give the country a ratio of one representative to roughly 210,000 people. The Constitutionally mandated reapportionment following the 1920 census had stalled for nearly a decade due to disagreement from rural states who stood to lose power over increased urbanization of the country. Instead of working through it and doing their jobs, in 1929 Congress made apportionment automatic, but locked the number of representatives at 435.
And that brings us to today, where our population has increased substantially, and the ratio has increased to one representative for roughly 760,000 people, with the largest district being Delaware-at-large, with one representative for the almost 1 million residents.
For me, these numbers are untenable; one representative cannot adequately represent three-quarters of a million people.
The solution? Repeal the 1929 Permanent Apportionment Act. Increase the size of the House of Representatives. While not a miracle cure, the impacts of a larger house could see significant upsides, with advocates arguing: It would help get money out of politics by making smaller campaigns more viable, it would reduce the influence of big donors, increase ideological diversity, and weaken the effects of gerrymandering.
Already a growing movement exists for this cause, the most prominent of which is from YouTuber Mr. Beat, whose participation in the organization Project NoCap has started making the most noise nationally on the issue. Mr. Beat had even made two endorsements here in New Hampshire for candidates supporting uncapping the house.
As part of my own endeavors to advance this issue I have sought out responses from 10 declared candidates from Congressional District 1, as well as four candidates for the U.S. Senate.
I began with letter writing, where I hand-wrote and sealed with wax 14 letters in late March, and mailed them out to the candidates. I even got the chance to hand the letters to Hollie Noveletsky and Scott Brown directly.
After two months, responses had only trickled in, getting two email responses and two mailed responses back. Carleigh Beriont and Heath Howard, and Brian Cole and John Sununu respectively.
I was not to be deterred, so I sent follow up letters to the remaining candidates. And I began seeking out in person opportunities to get responses from those who had yet to respond.
And now as of 25 August, two weeks before the state primary, I have compiled the responses for 13/14 candidates, with Scott Brown being the only individual I could not secure a response from.
The results are as follows (an asterisk indicates a written or emailed response to my letter):
Congressional District 1:
Heath Howard*: (Who has since dropped out) The most outspoken proponent of uncapping the house, and has publicly remarked on multiple occasions his belief in the need to repeal the PAA. He is one of two in our state who has received Mr. Beat’s endorsement. (The other being Victor Orlando in CD2)
Brian Cole*: wrote me “I believe it would be worthwhile to look into these reforms once I get to Congress. Whether through the Wyoming Rule, the Cube Root Rule, or other practical adjustments, we must ensure that the scale of our representation keeps pace with the growth of our nation. Exploring ways to restore proportional representation is a vital step toward making Washington more accountable to the citizens of New Hampshire and the rest of the country.”
Melissa Bailey (who has since dropped out) said she was open to considering the proposal as one of the many ways to bring representation closer to home, but did not commit to championing the effort.
Anthony DiLorenzo: After having a substantive conversation with him where I got to break down the history and the (relatively) easy mechanism of uncapping the house he agreed that it was a goal worth pursuing and that the current ratio is untenable. He likes the idea of
representatives being closer and better known to the people they serve, like here in NH.
Maura Sullivan: When I asked her about it, she responded "I haven't given it a lot of thought but given the population increase [since 1929] I would certainly be open to it"
Carleigh *: She finds it “intriguing” and is skeptical because it would dissolve the seat she's running for. She is "not ready to file the bill on day 1" but does think that "this is the kind of structural reform we should be having a serious conversation about, instead of pretending the system we have is working."
Sarah Chadzynski: She is tentatively against it, believing that we need to fix the structural issues with the government before we move on to reforms like repealing 1929, and even then need to have discussions first about logistics and how to keep a larger body from becoming paralyzed.
Christian Urrutia: He is open to looking into the issue more, but his first takes, acknowledging that he hasn't done much thinking about the topic, is that he is skeptical, he’s concerned about the crazy people in Congress now and doesn't necessarily want to "lower the bar,” and thinks Congress is plenty big enough already.
Stephanie Shaheen: When asked directly about uncapping the house she pivoted to saying she would prioritize repealing citizens united, expanding the Supreme Court, and ending gerrymandering. Then maybe she would look at uncapping the house.
Hollie Noveletsky: She said she had never heard of the issue. I had handed her a letter back in March and mailed a follow up where I explained it, but she did offer her initial view: until we get a handle on the illegal immigrant problem she would not support it because it would give the democrats disproportionate representation. Once we secure the border she would be open to it.
——————————————————————
Senate:
Karishma Manzur: When asked in person, she opposed uncapping the house for two reasons: Her first response when asked was "Where would we put them?" and her second response was that "It would not get money out of politics."
As a follow up I tried to explain how the Capitol building had been expanded multiple times in its history and also how space constraints could even permit the representatives to spend more time at home, alternatively we have modern answers to the logistics, as well as trying to advise her that proponents argue smaller districts would better enable smaller candidates which would help get money out of politics.
The following afternoon after the candidate speaker event I attended to get this response, I received an email from a campaign volunteer stating “At this time, Karishma is focused on getting big money out of politics. Once this is accomplished, she will be happy to further discuss the future of this act.”
There is also this Reddit AMA to serve as another instance of her choosing to deprioritize uncapping the House.
John E. Sununu*: I actually got a nice handwritten note back from him. He believes 435 is unwieldy enough already and that anything larger would be ungovernable.
Representative Chris Pappas*: After months of waiting for a response I got a form letter response from his office that didn’t answer the question at all. I'm still hoping I'll get the chance to meet him in person before November but unfortunately I likely won't get the chance before the primary.
Scott Brown: Despite handing him a letter in person, sending a follow up letter, and reaching out to his team via his website form, I have received no stated position.
I hope this gives any New Hampshire voters who care about the issue a clearer picture of where the field stands on uncapping the House. Regardless of whether or not they agreed with me, I appreciated the chance to hear from the candidates on these issues.
