Should we Expand the House of Representatives?

     I have to be completely honest and admit that i know very little on this matter, however, after reading a number of different articles, it is evident to me that some adjustments are in order to ensure a fair number of members in the House to accommodate the citizens of the United States. I am led to believe that there were originally only 65 members, but that number of members was adequate for the total population for that time. The number of members increased for every decade thereafter. According to, Brian Frederick, in 1913 there were 435 members of the House and that number has been set in stone since 1929—although todays population is three time as large. 

     In one article I read, "Do We Need A Bigger House Of Representatives?" from the website, Outside The Beltway, the author, Doug Mataconis,  suggested that the optimum number of members to meet the needs of todays population should be 680, that would mean that this amount of members would provide representation for every district population of 460,000. And, although these numbers do not coincide with what was originally suggested in the early history of the United States, they represent a realistic number to suit the needs without causing too much of a bother to the system. Brian Fredercik, says that the general public has lost faith in Congress and feel that they are being let down and unheard. This has created a distaste for the our current system based around the century-old law. 

     I believe that it is important for the citizens to be fairly represented by adopting a system that allows the Untied States to progress forward, while creating a balance that ensures that the population has a say in what powers and regulations are enforced upon them. Informed citizens will always be skeptical of the political system while there is an unequal number of members per population. Although I can agree that there is a need for more member of the House, I don't think that adding more members will completely satisfy the entire population, as some will most probably feel that their tax is being wasted on the wage required for the increase of staff.