You bring up an interesting point with the 'bribing 20,000 House Members' thing... If each House member were more accountable (responsible to fewer people), there would need to be a huge increase in the number of Representatives.  (Let's ignore the logistics of 'how they all come together to debate', etc.  Note: 'Online' isn't an option, just see the manipulation of FB, Twitter, etc.) I would argue that the folks that bribe House members would still do so.  And they'd spend the same amount of money for the same influence.  How so?  Each vote would now be worth 1/20,000th of the whole, not 1/435th of the whole, so each bribe would be much smaller.  (Law of supply and demand.)  The total amount of bribe money would be the same (or nearly the same).  And with 20,000 people to oversee, it would take a lot more oversight. Agree, or disagree?