New Hampshire has a population 1.3 million and has 400 state Assembly Districts representing an average of 3,327 people. California has 30 times as many people, but only has 80 Assembly Districts with an average of 489,000 constituents.
If California and New Hampshire were equally represented California would have 12,022 representatives in their state assembly instead on 80.
Montana has less than one million people and California has nearly 40 million, Montana has 50 state senators and California has only 40. If both states were equally represented California would have 2,000 state senators.
If California and Montana had equal representation in the state assemblies, California would have 3,873 representatives instead of 80.
Thirty states have districts with an average of less than 50,000 constituents. California has districts with an average of nearly 500,000 constituents.
If California had the same number of constituents per district as New Hampshire, they would have 11,766 Representatives in their lower house instead of 80.
Pennsylvania would have 3,848 instead of 203.
Can you say conspiracy?
Here's another one for ya.
Wyoming has 60 Representatives at the state level to organize and watch over ONE STATE! Yet only ONE Representative in Congress even though the Constitution says they should have more like 20.
Montana has 100 Representatives to administrate ONE STATE! Yet they have ONLY ONE Representative in Congress while the Constitution says they should have 35.
What's wrong with this picture?