The kicker is at the end, though... the math is wrong and becomes inconsistent when the population hits 8-10 million (which was about 1820, or so): ...an inconsistency exists in the mathematical formula when the nation's population is between eight million and ten million, as the final version of the proposed amendment specifies a minimum number of House seats greater than the maximum. As a result, the amendment would be unworkable and any number of representatives unconstitutional.
Doesn't fuckin' matter. It started at 30,000 then became 30-50,000. Edit it and pass it. Amusing that the entire section has been a mild edit war since August.
I'm wondering what it would be like to try and get ~7500 Representatives to vote on a bill...? "Do we have a quorum?" "No, only 2600 members showed up to vote on the measure. The rest are caught in traffic..." Maybe Estonia can come over and help us set up their eGovernment system that works so well...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_legislatures_by_number_of_members 3,000 members in China's lower house. We've been doing government-by-zoom for six months now. We can't pretend the shit doesn't work. By the way, if you sort that list by population-to-seat, the bottom of the list is China-Bangladesh-EU-US-India.