Is the U.S. House too small?

Facts from article:

1. The House has consisted of 435 members since 1911.
2. Since 1911, the average population of U.S. Congressional districts has more than tripled, going from 200,000 to 640,000 citizens.
3. If the House were to increase in size, there would be 650 seats (taking the cube root of the U.S.'s population.
4. A poll showed about 20% of the public believes in increasing the size of the House, about 60% believe it should be kept as it is, and 20% thinks there should be less members.
5. Research finds members of larger districts may have a more difficult time connecting with and representing their constituents.

Questions:

1. Are illegal immigrants counted in the U.S. census? (Do they count in the U.S. population?) If yes, how might this affect the number of seats in the House?
2. What restrictions or rules may be added (or removed) if the number if seats in the House increases or decreases?
3. How did they determine there would be 435 from only 65 (in 1789) members of the House before?
4. Are there more advantages or disadvantages in having a larger House?
5. Does the size of the House have a significant effect on the economy(their pay, assets, etc.)?

I believe there should not be more seats in the House. Sure the population has significantly increased, however, most citizens only vote in the presidential elections. Having a larger House would make things more difficult in agreeing on things and passing anything in general. Increasing the number of seats in the House may also call for more restrictions, rules, and regulations within the House because there'd be so many members to control and consider in the voting process. The House would seem to be much more crowded and chaotic than it already is 435 seats, so having 650 may just make things more hectic.