New Opportunities in Congressional Representation

Having volunteered on a Congressional campaign this past election cycle, I am struck by what a challenge it is for current and prospective Members of Congress to connect with the electorate.

As Article 1, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution states that "the number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand" people. Based on this metric, for the 1st and 2nd Congresses (1789-1793) there were 65 members of the House of Representatives. The first decennial census in 1790 gave a more accurate count of the new republic's population, which stood at 3.9 million people. Accordingly, membership of the House of Representatives was increased to 106 after re-apportionment. This number stood for the 3rd through 7th Congresses, 1793-1803. Similar increases occurred after every decennial census throughout the 19th Century. However, after the 1910 decennial census, Congress decided to limit the membership in the House to 435. Since then, the average number of people represented by each member of the House has ballooned to 646,952. Each of the 53 members of the House of Representatives from California currently represents 681,739 people.

What I'm trying to get at here is that the current "representation load" borne by each member of the House of Representatives is far greater than the framers of the Constitution intended. How does a single member of Congress interact with 680,000 people? How does the member most-accurately gauge the ideas, beliefs and values of the people they represent? And how does the Member share thoughts, news and issue updates with the voters?

Historically, these functions would largely take place in face-to-face interactions like town hall meetings. However, for a member of Congress today to attempt face-to-face interactions with every singled represented individual would be impossible. Each member of Congress from California would have to speak with a crowd of 934 different people, 7 days a week for the entire 2-year term to which he/she is elected. And that doesn't include any time for the elected representative to travel to Washington, DC to vote on our behalf.

Alternately, mass media has allowed members of Congress to communicate with more people than would be possible to personally interact with. The local printing presses and political pamphlets of the past have given way to radio and television as powerful tools for elected officials and candidates to communicate with the electorate. However there are two large problems with using mass media as a supporting pillar for republican government.

First, mass media costs money. Relying on mass media for communication with voters drives up the cost of Congressional campaigns, and encourages candidates to rely more on large donors than individuals. To make matters more complex, mass media advertising costs different amounts of money in different areas. A 30-second prime time spot in New York, Chicago or Los Angeles would cost much more than a comparable purchase in a smaller television market. Second, mass media is a one-way street. It allows candidates and members of Congress to communicate ideas to constituents, but not engage them in a dialogue.

New technologies have recently provided us with a possible solution - networked organizations. This is a tool that is increasingly used in the private sector to bring decision-makers closer to the consumer. Could these ideas be adapted to perform a similar function and shorten the distance between members of the House of Representatives and the 680,000 people they represent? There has been success with the so-called netroots campaigns of 2004 and 2006, but what sorts of hurdles would need to be overcome to put this kind of structure in place for everyday communication between Representatives and constituents? Would the government subsidize internet access and computers for everyone? Over the next few months I will occasionally focus articles on this topic, in order to encourage discussion on how we can improve the structures of our republican government.