The AOC thing was only the hook. The idea is, is it working for a congressperson (CP) to represent 800 K people. One of the problems is money in politics. This problem seems to be intractable. With the supreme court ruling that corps are people it seems like any effort to reduce the disproportion influence money has on CPs is doomed. CPs also spend on average 3 hours a day fundraising. They have to to have the money to run ads and expensive campaigns to get elected. They also will tell you that they have to give access to people who will donate big dollars vs ordinary constituents.

But what if each CP had a district of 80K people like in the UK and Canada? Campaigning would be more affordable. CPs would be closer to their voters. And it could be done without costing the gov't more money. Right now a CP gets 174K plus average 1.3 million for office expenses and travel. . But you could take the office expenses and use them to pay more CPs. You could for instance have 5 CPs each representing 150K people and each give them 250 K for office expenses and travel. Or you could go all the way and have 10 CPs and double the cost. The cost of CPs is a minor fraction of the cost of gov't. If they save 1 percent of the federal budget they would pay for themselves several times over.

There are some practical issues like where would you seat 2000 CPs in congress. But surely there is a tech fix for that. Some might argue that they cannot see 2000 people getting the work done efficiently. But I would argue the 435 people is way too many to get things done efficiently anyway.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot