> what exactly is the optimal size of a national assembly?
This is indeed an interesting question, and I submit that the US is in an awkward state where the national assembly is simultaneously too large and too small.
I've seen some statistics that suggest that assemblies tend to start degrading in quality when you get past 300 or so: you end up in a situation where too many members just have nothing to do. At the same time, it's almost certainly the case that the US House has too few members for them to be sufficiently responsive to their constituents.
This is indeed an interesting question, and I submit that the US is in an awkward state where the national assembly is simultaneously too large and too small.
I've seen some statistics that suggest that assemblies tend to start degrading in quality when you get past 300 or so: you end up in a situation where too many members just have nothing to do. At the same time, it's almost certainly the case that the US House has too few members for them to be sufficiently responsive to their constituents.