Lee Drutman and Yuval Levin in WaPo. They (correctly) don’t argue that expanding the House would combat gerrymandering. At the scale envisioned (an increase from 435 to 585), it wouldn’t be any harder to manipulate the somewhat more numerous districts.

And yet, for just that reason, it is time to expand the House. The framers of the Constitution assumed we would do that regularly, but we have now failed to do so for more than a century. In the first Congress, there were just 65 House members, each of whom represented about 30,000 Americans. As the nation grew, the House expanded by statute after every decennial census throughout the 19th century. It reached its current size in 1913, when each of its 435 members represented about 210,000 people. But the number of members has not increased since then, even as the country’s population has more than tripled. Each member now represents about 760,000 Americans. And that has changed the very meaning of representation in Congress. . . .

More House members representing a finer-grained political diversity could also make meaningful intraparty factions more likely, and with them a greater possibility of legislative bargaining and accommodation across party lines.