Fun point. We have had 435 Representatives in the house since 1911 (with a 4 year exception when it went to 437). Our Founding Fathers wanted it locked in at 50k to 60k per Representative, we now have an average of 800k (source I am fact checking them now, however even if those particular facts aren’t true, their idea of more Representatives is a good one). NOTE: All that follows is a work in progress…I may modify it as I go along and further refine my ideas.
If we limited to the 50k our Founding Fathers originally wanted the size difference between districts would be less than 5%. There would be 6,000 members of the House and would far better represent their local populace. We could, if cost was a huge concern, limit it to one member for each 100k, this still results in 3,000 (or nearly anything up to say one rep for each 300k… no more than 500k).

With modern technology there is no need to have every member of the House in the building in DC… as a matter of fact, from a security point it is better, and there is nothing in the Constitution that would stop us from using modern technology to do it. And by leaving them in their home districts we could cut the expense of having them all in Washington. For direct representation in DC, if we wanted to continue to house 435 people in the the Capital itself, then each state’s legislative body and governor would decide who went to DC. Who went wouldn’t matter since being in the Capital itself doesn’t increase their voting power. If they wanted they could rotate so all of them get a chance, but to reduce costs perhaps best to leave it set. I would also suggest a pay cut to help with the expense of so many Reps, especially since most will be in their home district. At the very least a big cut to the size and costs of their staff and other expenses.

This does increase the difficulty of getting things done, since now you have far more people to sell on a plan, but in the end we end up with less pork, less ear marks and a government that is forced to be more focused on actual governance and more bills would become far simpler in order to get them passed.
Such a plan would greatly reduce Gerrymandering. It could be reduced further by devising a GIS based program to draw district lines without regard to politics… as a matter of fact, this should be done even if we stay with the 435 number we have now. That alone would improve representation.

We also need to remove the first past the post voting method in the US for all federal offices… I would say for state level offices as well. There are two primary alternatives, the Alternative Vote and the Single Transfer Vote. I would say for the House, use the Alternative Vote, for the Senate and President use STV. On the election form they are more or less the same, it is how they are counted that changes.

We need a change to the electoral college as well to make things work. Right now, some states are winner take all. That ends. Whoever wins a representative district wins the electoral vote. The remaining two electoral votes do go to whomever won the state. This should happen regardless if we stick with 435 Representatives or increase it, and again should happen if we stick with FPTP or move to a more modern voting system like AV or STV. You wouldn’t get away with ending the electoral college, the small states wouldn’t go for it, but they wouldn’t mind removing the winner take all… as a matter of fact they probably would prefer it. Now with a STV voting system those last two electoral votes could end up being split between two canidates, or end up with just one depending on how the count ended up and the minimum threshold set to get to win both votes… by default it would result in two each time.

We also need a Constitutional Amendment to reverse the Citizens United vs FEC decision the Republican controlled Supreme Court made that gave unlimited power to corporations to buy elections without any checks or balances.

With all these changes we would have a far more Representative government that is less concerned about the special interest groups. And with moving from the Fist Past the Vote method of electing officials, we greatly reduce the power of the two party system.

Then I would say we can start making other drastic changes that need to be made. Greatly reduce our military spending. Right now we spend more than the next 15 countries combined (not counting North Korea as those who count such things for some reason can’t make a good estimate on North Korea’s military expenditures). We could cut it in half and still spend as much as the next 6 countries combined. As a percentage of our GDP, we spend more than twice what most countries do on their military budgets, so cutting it in half brings us in line that way as well. With those huge savings, we could more than afford not only all those Representatives, but avoid cutting important public programs like education, Medicare and all the other things that the Republicans want to cut so they can have tax cuts for the rich.

The problem is we are now stuck in a plutocracy and getting out of that will take a consecrated effort of the people. The rich who control government and the media today wouldn’t want any of the above changes to be made. The Republican’s make no attempt to hid the fact they only care for the ultra rich, and thanks to media outlets like Fox and right-wing radio they convince their audiences to ignore logic and to accept it as for their own good, while it clearly isn’t. The Democrats pretend to be for the people, and sometimes are, but are too wimpy to stand up against the ultra rich and in the end serve them as well. This will only be fixed when the people rise up and demand change. The ideas proposed here will move the power back to the people. Yes some districts will still be part of the plutocracy, but with all the changes above made, it would become far too expensive to control as much as they do now. It is easy to buy 435 people, but 6,000 people especially when you are no longer using First Past the Post and unbiased districts… Once again government would be for the people and by the people and not just for the upper 1 or 2 percent that it represents now. Power to the people.

Most of what follows I talk about in Why I’ll Never Vote Republican Again… And the Democrats Are on Shaky Ground Too, but I’ll retouch on a few of them here in brief, read that one for more details.
Then roll back the Bush tax cuts on those making over $250,000 a year. We are talking a small increase that they can easily afford, and don’t repeat the lie about how it will lead to a loss of jobs. In the 10+ years of the Bush tax cuts we haven’t had an increase in jobs, but a greater and greater loss of jobs. Our so called recovery right now isn’t because jobs are being generated and in fact the poor and working class continue to get worse while the upper 2% or so are the only ones having a recovery. An extra 3% isn’t much for somebody making that kind of money.

Close loopholes that allow speculators to make millions a year and pay nothing in taxes. Right now, as an individual, you can make $9 Million a year in profits and pay zero on it because it doesn’t count as income until you cash it out. Close that loophole.

GE, Bank of America, Exxon Mobile are examples of companies that paid zero in taxes despite reporting huge profits to their investors. We need to bring that back to reality. If you are making those huge profits, then you can’t get away paying zero in taxes.

Close the Social Security Tax loophole. How much does a person making a million a year pay in Social Security taxes? The same as a person making a bit over $106,000. Keep it going. Social Security they keep saying is in trouble, and little wonder if the rich don’t contribute the same percentage that everyone else does.
Don’t give the lie about the rich pay half the taxes and the bottom 50% of the population pay zero. When people quote that they are talking about Federal Income Tax only, which accounts for something like 25% of one’s tax burden. When you talk about taxes overall, the ultra rich pay less than the others.

Here are some videos about the voting systems I talked about:

First Past the Post (which is what we use in the US):

Then the Alternative Vote (sometimes called the Instant Runoff Vote):

As soon as this guy finishes his video series, I’ll add his explanation of the Single Transferable Vote.

Voila, a new video was added that does indeed explain the STV:

Also in that time he explained Gerrymandering :

I personally still think that computer drawn lines are best…

And Mixed-Member Proportional: