This would be a good thing, maybe reduce by 1/3.  With botuh houses now based on population, some counties simply have too mcuh representation and the legislature has too many people.

Ship Island

Heck, if the House doesn’t like it, the Senate should offer a version that only reduces the size of the Senate. It would still be good policy and good politics. The the House would have to defend why it is fighting against decreasing the size of the Senate only.

I figure this has low odds of success.

However, I question the whole concept of a bicameral legislature.  Our national founders only went this route for a political compromise on representation.  They had long planned on a unicameral one.  I assume the 49 states just did monkey-see, monkey-do?

But if we’re stuck w/ 2 houses, why not (and I guess this requires a constitutional amendment?) make a difference in the representation instead of just draw different districts.  I’d like to see Senators take a wider view.  Maybe we don’t need more than 4 or 5 per congressional district?

But again, assuming that won’t fly.  I just don’t see a reason to have two houses that have districts determined in basically the same manner.  If we must have 2, I lean towards one that brings the members very close to the people and one that is more focused on the greater, long-term good.  Even to the point of staggering terms maybe.