A BRIGHTER FUTURE
Let's Make a Difference
GET ON BOARD
Take Part in Something Great
TAKE BACK THE HOUSE
FORWARD
​
Do you feel like your vote just doesn't really matter that much anymore?
Does it seem like the system is stacked against you?
Are you tired of just changing one set of Billionaires for another set with each Presidential election?
Tired of Americans being pitted against other Americans – instead of our enemies?
Do you only hear from your Representative in the House of Representatives when they want money?
How about the constant budget battle and threats of shutting down the government?
Or continually increased spending without proper oversight by the House of Representatives?
Want to take action but don’t like either party so you feel helpless to make change?
​
This is a quote from the National Archives:
"The Constitution acted like a colossal merger, uniting a group of states with different interests, laws, and cultures. Under America’s first national government, the Articles of Confederation, the states acted together only for specific purposes. The Constitution united its citizens as members of a whole, vesting the power of the union in the people."
​
You see, we are what is written above. How we act, or chose not to act, will be our history.​​​
To read and download the Constitution: The National Archives
​​​​​
Americans Have Lost Their Voice Due to OUR Lack of Representation:​
​​
The United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 2; states::
"The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manneras they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand"
​​
Ninety-five years ago, both parties in a bipartisan agreement voted to ‘lock us out’ by freezing the size of the House of Representatives at 435 representatives with the bipartisan bill titled the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929. Until 1910, the numbers of Representatives was increased to accommodate a larger population.
There were several reasons they used to justify the freeze:
​​
-The physical size of the Capitol building is too small to accommodate a larger House.
​
- Concern that an increasingly larger House would become less effective and too difficult to manage.
​
-Too many logistical problems for staff, office space, seating, etc.
​​
- Politicians (there were only Republicans & Democrats) were worried about the political consequences of continuously expanding the House.
​
- Concerns of under representation for small states
​
Ninety-five years ago, each Representative represented around 210,000 people. Today each House member represents roughly 781,000 people. How can 1 person in the House even begin to represent 781,00 people?
​
What wasn’t spoken about at the time, or since is the real reason of why.
​
Since 1869 there have been only two real political parties in the U.S. – Democrats & Republicans. It took them 60 years to figure out that if both parties agreed to set the maximum number of House members at 435, it would lockout any hopes of a third party to compete with the Elephants and Donkeys. They were right.
We the People now have what, in part, the Revolutionary War was fought over –‘Taxation Without Representation’. We are in the same situation today except it’s not England this time. It’s our elected officials that no longer represent us and provide proper fiscal oversight, as required by the Constitution, due to their forced allegiances to their rich donors.
We don’t own our own country anymore. It’s controlled by the rich elite in every industry:
Government. Healthcare. Education. Finance. Defense. Non-Profit. Pharmaceutical. Agriculture. Powerful Special Interest groups. Highly paid lobbyists. (You know what I’m talking about).
We need to take back control.
No Constitutional Amendment is required - it only requires Congress to pass an act!
'The People's Permanent Appropriations Act For Proper Representation of 2026'
​
Regardless of who is President, We the People will still be subjected to ultra-partisanship, worsening gridlock of our elected and appointed officials, and continue to be ‘collateral damage’ until we ‘Take Back the House’.
​
I do believe the majority of our Representatives from both parties are there to make a positive contribution and have good intent. However they are saddled with our strong partisan divide, Party First-Country Second leadership, the necessity of constant fundraising due to the large cost of running for office, the impact of the more extreme wings of each party controlling the process, and quite simply a huge lack of time.
​
This document will lay the foundation for every-day, average Americans, like myself, to become involved in the process to increase the size of the House of Representatives and dramatically upset, and reduce the influence of money in our House races, and even run for Congress if they choose.
When was the last time you bumped into your Representative at a coffee shop or a grocery store? When was the last time you even heard from them that didn’t ask you for money? When was the last time you reached out to them?
This isn’t about politics, or which policy is best or worse.
This is about all of us having Proper Representation
SECTION I:
COMPARATIVE CITIZEN REPRESENTATION
IN CURRENT DEMOCRACIES
Washington Monument - Britannica
One of the key arguments against increasing the size of the House is the concern that it will make it too difficult for the House to conduct business and keep order. For who? It’s a lot easier to keep two political parties ‘in order’ than three, or more parties. I interpert that as ‘more than two parties would create havoc for ‘we the two parties.’’
Proof is the lack of the development of any significant third parties, except for the Reform Party candidate Ross Perot gaining 18.9% of the popular vote in 1992. (I voted for him)
In the United States of America our current representation averages one House member for every 760,000 people. In 1910, which is when the House first reached 435 members, the population was 92 million people and there was one Member per every 211,494 persons . When the Constitution was first ratified it averaged one member for every 60,450 people. There were 65 members representing 3.9 million people in 13 states.
​
As a couple examples, the United Kingdom has 650 members in its lower chamber with a population of 68.4 million, which is 1 Representative for every 98,066 persons. Germany has 735 Representatives with a population of 84.5 million, which is 1 Representative for every 115,112 persons.
​
​
​
SECTION II:
THE POWER OF RICH PEOPLE'S
POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS
As we witnessed in this 2024 election
Billionaires are the Representatives
How much attention do you think your or my $5, $25, $50, $100, $250, or $500 donation gets compared to this partial list of super rich donors supporting both parties. Below is a link to the biggest donors.
List of donors: https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/biggest-donors
Take a look at just the top ten known contributors…
Elon Musk $250,000,000 R
Timothy Mellon $197,000,000 R
Rich/Eliz Uihlein $137,800,000 R
Miriam Adelson $136,800,000 R
Kenneth Griffith $101,400,000 R
Jeff/Janine Yass $96,900,000 R
Paul Singer $61,304,000 R
Bill Gates $50,000,000 D
Michael Bloomberg $46,900,000 D
Steven Schwarzman $39,100,000 R
Dustin Moskovitz $38,700,000 D
Me $ 500 Independent
You $_________ ??
Big vs. Small Donors
In the 2024 Presidential race the campaign committee of Kamala Harris received 57% of her funds from BIG donors, and 43% from SMALL donors. Donald Trump’s campaign committee received 71% of his funds from BIG donors, and 29% from SMALL donors.
SECTION III:
HOW THE LAW IS CHANGED
Compliments of thechiefonline.com
I was with a group of friends gathered together on Election night 2024, and I brought up the need to dramatically increase the size of the House of Representatives to make it reflect our ever-increasing size of population. I heard a couple comments it would require a Constitutional amendment, or the size is set in the Constitution. In reality it doesn’t require the Constitution to be changed in any way.
Since Congress arbitrarily can adjust the size of the House to any number they want, they simply passed a law to freeze the number at 435 seats, and as soon as the President at that time signed it, it became effective. All that is necessary is for the Senate and the House to pass a new law rescinding the old law and setting the new number to 1,305. Once the President signs it, it's the new law.
​
Rather than come up with a complicated formula simply triple the number of representatives in each district. My hope is the law gets changed in time to allow for the first election to occur in 2028.
Of course, since the two parties control Congress and the Presidency it will likely require a couple million of us, from all walks of life and political beliefs, to peacefully march on Washington to demand it.
SECTION IV:
WHY INCREASE THE HOUSE TO 1,305 MEMBERS
The single most important reason to size up to 1,305 Representatives is to make up for the last 100 years of no increases, and to protect the future as it likely won't be adjusted for another 30-50 years
​​
Until 1913 Congress increased the size of the House with ‘every subsequent Term of ten Year’ (census), as is recommended by the U.S. Constitution. The House size was set at 435 in 1911 after the 1910 census, and was frozen at 435 members by the bipartisan (D’s & R’s) Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929. My opinion is both parties realized that by capping the House at 435 it would become more difficult for a 3rd party to be formed to compete with the Donkeys and Elephants. We are now experiencing the fruits of their labor and our country’s partisan divide is a direct, and predictable outcome of it.
​
Have you heard anyone in either party talk about increasing the size of the House? How about the mainstream, upstream, downstream, livestream, and no stream media? Neither party has a willingness to even discuss this subject, let alone embrace it. And the result is our total frustration with the hypocrisy of leaders on both sides and their lack of accountability to The People.
​
Republican Senators are complaining that Democrats stalled the process of approving Trump appointments. Under Biden the Democrats complained about Republican stall tactics, and under Obama the same. Don’t they see how ridiculous they are to The People? Both sides try to screw over the other and then complain about it like it’s something new. Meanwhile, We The People are the ones that actually get screwed.
​
Project 1305 proposes to increase the size of the House of Representatives by 3X — with 870 new Districts and new Representatives. Say What!?
​
One of the first persons I shared this with responded, ‘What, and have even greater dysfunction?’ and ‘What about the cost?’
Sure, I get it. It’ll just be harder to get things done and will cost us so much more. To that I say ‘BS’.
​
In regard to getting things done, I certainly don’t believe it would be any worse than our current dysfunction with the far left and right wings of the two parties running our Country. America’s population was 92 million in 1910, and it’s 340 million people in 2024. On average, we now have 1 Representative for every 760,000 people. In Montana, they have just 1 Representative for their population of 1,137,233 people, and South Dakota has just 1 with a population of 924,000 people.
​
How can any single Representative possibly provide proper Governance?
The House needs to modernize and the argument of ‘where would they meet’ is a non-starter. There is plenty of room in the current Capitol Building to renovate the House Chamber to accommodate 1,305 members to meet and vote. They may not all have offices in the Capitol Building but that should not prevent the People from having appropriate representation. Plus, during those sessions they won’t have the gallery of cheerleaders. Those seats will be taken by Representatives. They won't have as much room to spread out, and may even be forced to ‘sit with the enemy’ versus on opposite sides. Sorry, the People are supposed to come first.
​
But what about the huge cost? My response is just look at the cost of not gaining the level of oversight we citizens need! Currently, between wages, benefits, the cost of staff in D.C. and in district, along with cost of building maintenance, the Capitol Police, etc., each House member costs about $4.4 million per year. Adding 870 new Representatives would add close to $4 Billion per year.
​
The General Accounting Office identified up to $500 Billion dollars of waste or fraud in America’s annual expenditures. So let’s see, a $4 Billion dollars investment to get back $500 Billion? There’s not a hedge fund manager around that wouldn’t take that bet.
Just look at the cost overruns in our Department of Defense. Per President Tump, America’s newest aircraft carrier wasn’t just over budget — it was gloriously over budget.
​
As quoted in Business Insider, “Look at the Gerald Ford, the aircraft carrier,” Trump said. “It was supposed to cost $3 billion. It ends up costing like $18 billion.”
In addition, consider the B-1 Bombers, or the U.S. Navy’s Columbia-class submarine program, or Abrams tanks —which are all armaments over budget due to lack of Proper Representation in the House, resulting in non-effective Oversight by the House. Don’t get me wrong about our military spending. We need a strong military, but our single largest budget expense needs sufficient oversight.
Our lobbyists and defense contractors certainly have a lot of oversight. Apparently, not so much for our Generals that have signed off on the invoices the last 25–30 years. Lobbying has continued its upward spiral to set a new spending record in 2024 — $4.4 Billion! Per this article by Open Secrets, “The most common issue addressed by lobbyists was federal spending, with lobbying pushing for increased appropriations, following a recent trend.”
​
Companies don’t continue to invest in something unless it pays off. With over 12,000 lobbyists hounding our 435 Representatives, WE are outnumbered by 27 lobbyists for each House member. 27–1 are not good odds for our side.
​
This graph from Satistica shows where the lobbyists focus their, and their clients’ attention:
Check out #1 on the list! Of course it’s the largest target.
​​​​​ ​​​​​​​​​​​​
​​​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​​
SECTION V:
ADVOCATES FOR SIZING UP THE HOUSE
There are a number of individuals, groups and institutions that are recommending SIZING UP THE HOUSE. However, to my knowledge there is no organized, local or national movement focused only on this vision. Most of those advocating also list several other recommendations for improving governance which do have merit.
PROJECT 1305 FOCUSES ONLY ON SIZING UP THE HOUSE
​​​
There is a number of groups, individuals and political commentators that agree with increasing the size of the House.
For them it's not if it should be sized up, it's how many new Members should be added.
These groups also advocate other changes such as citizen redistricting, campaign finance reform, Supreme Court limits, voter registration, one year of national service, and others.
Some of the groups are the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (AMACAD), Fix the System, Fair Vote, Equal Citizens among others.​​
​
SECTION VI:
THE ACTIVISM
FOR CITIZENS TO BE FULLY ENGAGED IT REQUIRES OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ENGAGE WITH US
John Adams
WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DON'T TAKE ACTION:
​
A further degradation of our society and American way of life due to:
​
1) Americans totally losing their Voice
2) Increased distrust and cynicism of elected officials and of government
3) Greater social and economic disparity and inequality
4) Missed opportunities to move our country forward due to lack of compromise
5) Greater political disenfranchisement, heightened sense of frustration and disillusionment
6) Increase in feeling alienated, hopeless and fostering a sense of exclusion and resentment
7) Continued deterioration of innovation and progress​​​
8) Social unrest and civil disobedience
9) Long-term loss of global standing and influence
John Adams and James Madison both warned us in 1776 of the dangers of a two-party system. John Adams wrote that Congress, “should be in miniature, an exact portrait of the people at large. It should think, feel, reason and act like them.”
James Madison
A strong and vibrant democracy requires that its citizenry be informed and active in the governing process. Many factors ranging from busy work and life schedules, general disinterest, disinterest due to extreme partisanship, the lack of Compromise being subjugated to Win at All Costs, hypocrisy of our elected officials, distrust of the system and a myriad of other reasons. But for a Citizenry to be fully engaged it first requires our elected officials engaging with us.