Image, Anja Bergher
Don't feel inadequate if you don't know.
Members of Congress seldom say this number in public because few Americans know that today it can go down even when a state's population doesn't.
The Apportionment clause requires that every Representative represent the same number of people.But population increases unevenly among states. Ever since the number of Representatives was frozen Congress has used an intricate formula (redesigned every time we redistrict to advantage the party then in power) to shift the number of Representatives among states to appear caused by differences among state populations without adding to the total number of representatives in Congress. Under this formula, states sometimes lose Representatives without having decreased in population.They can even lose Representatives after increasing in population.
This shifting varies states' relative degrees of consent every time, violating Article IV, Section 2 which requires treating states equally in the political process (see Consent of the Governed, Invalid Amendment by Statute). It also concentrates power (see Frozen Apportionment – More Issues).
And a fudge factor has been added:Representatives at large, whose definition varies but who currently represent states whose populations wouldn't be enough to give them a district each by the ratio chosen. No one even tries to make these districts appear to have been apportioned by Article I. They have nothing to do with population, invalidly amending the Apportionment clause anyway and making all the shifting irrelevant even on its face. Freezing apportionment isn’t the only or the best way to balance representation among large and small states (see Redistricting Without Gerrymandering).
(The number of your state's Representatives can be found at ballotpedia.org.)