One Country, Fifty States, Many Districts.

[SavannahMann]

The system designed by the Founders was and remains brilliant. Our system represents the people, the states, and the nation at various levels.

There are times when we are districts, times when we are states, and times when we are one nation. But let me explain.

The House of Representatives was always intended to be where populist pressure was brought. These populist pressures can change quickly, and so everyone is put up for re-election every two years. They represent the people. The people within their districts. The idea behind this was that a segment of the population would be represented by these short term politicians who would then go home and report and let the people approve, re-elect them, or disapprove, and elect another.

But populist pressure is a fleeting thing, and sometimes does not take into account the best interests of the States. Thus the Senate was born. Originally the Senate was sort of like the Ambassadors from the States. These Senators would be appointed by the State Government, and serve for a few years, representing the best interests of the States to the Federal Government. This system was not quite perfect. A Governor serving four years might not be able to appoint but one single senator, and perhaps none. So the new Governors would expect the Senators to resign, and worse, getting state Legislatures to approve of the new Senators turned out to be ten times as difficult as the Founders had imagined.

Times changed, and we changed the Constitution, to tweak the original design, as intended, with a Constitutional Amendment. The founders knew that things might need to be have small tweaks, or major changes, and put forth a mechanism to do it. Setting the mechanism to a difficult to reach standard, in order to give everyone time to think about it, and insuring that the vast majority of the Country agreed.

Senators would be elected, and still serve a six year term. Yet, they would be elected by the States, the entire population of a state, to insure that the Senators continued to represent the views of the State as a whole.

Each State would have two senators, allowing people to reconsider the direction of the Federal Government at the upper house level, less often, but with far greater implications.

Finally, we are one country. The founders intended the President to speak for the Country. It is why they gave him the power over the executive Branch. The Country as a whole would elect the president. One voice, for one country.

Do you see the brilliance? Your local issues can be put forth in Washington by your Local Representative to the House of Representatives. Your State issues can be heard in Washington by your Senator. Your national issues are addressed by the President. Each one a step up, each one a level of authority greater than the one before.

Think about it. Each State only gets two Senators. All States are equal, all States are represented equally. Each district has a number of people in it, and no state may have less than one. So you could live in Wyoming where the really difficult fight is for the House of Representatives. There can be only one.

We are the United States. The President is the Chief Executive of the United States. All States. All of them, together, united. The Senator represents the entire State. The Senator from California has exactly the same voting power as the Senator from Maine, or Florida. All States are equal. All States are equally represented. None are forgotten, none are ignored, and none can be dominated by another. The Representatives are of the people, the districts. After the ONE minimum is accounted for, the rest of the people are represented by the population numbers The People are represented, as equally as possible without ignoring any. Genius.

American democracy’s Senate problem, explained

No, the Senate is not unfair. The Senate is not intended to represent the people, but the State, as a whole. No the House is not unfair, it is intended to represent the people of the districts, and there must be at least one. No, the electoral College is not unfair. It takes into account all of this. Insuring that the States are represented at the minimum, while allowing the population to be represented by a much larger value.

It insures that being a locally supported Politician does not allow you to overwhelm the entire nation. You must win more than a handful of states to win the Election. Some states matter more than others, but every single one of them matter.

Absolute Genius.

No, there is no Democracy problem in the Senate. It is exactly as intended, all of the States represented equally. We are not the Americas. We don’t elect the President of the American People. We are many things. We are one nation, fifty states, and 435 districts, all at the same time. Just as we are in reality, we are in Washington. One Nation, Fifty States, and 435 Districts.

 

[kyzr]

Not much to disagree with in the OP, the Founding Fathers were remarkable.
Except the dems whine about the Electoral College .
Their whines sound so pitiful....

 

[longknife]

The biggest problem is how the Congress has organized itself - as laid out in the constitution to be their responsibility.

Each house has different rules of procedure and organization. The absolute worst about both is that longevity is used to determine positions of power within the committees.

Here's an example:

The House Armed Services Committee
The Chairman, Adam Smith, has never served one day in uniform!
The Vice Chair, Anthony Brown, dropped out of West Point but became a commissioned Army chopper pilot for 5 years
Ranking Member Mac Thorberry has never served a single day in uniform.

And these are the folk who decide what's best for our armed services.

What's wrong with that?

And, I think that explains exactly why The Washington Establishment hates President Trump so much. He didn't stand in line to wait for his turn to hold his position. He went around The Seniority System.

 

[SavannahMann]

The biggest problem is how the Congress has organized itself - as laid out in the constitution to be their responsibility.

Each house has different rules of procedure and organization. The absolute worst about both is that longevity is used to determine positions of power within the committees.

Here's an example:

The House Armed Services Committee
The Chairman, Adam Smith, has never served one day in uniform!
The Vice Chair, Anthony Brown, dropped out of West Point but became a commissioned Army chopper pilot for 5 years
Ranking Member Mac Thorberry has never served a single day in uniform.

And these are the folk who decide what's best for our armed services.

What's wrong with that?

And, I think that explains exactly why The Washington Establishment hates President Trump so much. He didn't stand in line to wait for his turn to hold his position. He went around The Seniority System.

Experience does not equate wisdom. The Desert One mission was drawn up by the leading Generals of the era. The Generals of Cuban Missile Crisis wanted to invade. Experts all would have gotten us into Nuclear War. Generals opposed Reagan and Star Wars.

 

[SavannahMann]

The biggest problem is how the Congress has organized itself - as laid out in the constitution to be their responsibility.

Each house has different rules of procedure and organization. The absolute worst about both is that longevity is used to determine positions of power within the committees.

Here's an example:

The House Armed Services Committee
The Chairman, Adam Smith, has never served one day in uniform!
The Vice Chair, Anthony Brown, dropped out of West Point but became a commissioned Army chopper pilot for 5 years
Ranking Member Mac Thorberry has never served a single day in uniform.

And these are the folk who decide what's best for our armed services.

What's wrong with that?

And, I think that explains exactly why The Washington Establishment hates President Trump so much. He didn't stand in line to wait for his turn to hold his position. He went around The Seniority System.

Forgive me for a second response. The one last night was in haste, to make sure I got a reply out, but I wanted to expound on it.

Dr. John P. Craven was the Mad Scientist of the Navy during the most interesting era in history. The fact that we have Ballistic Missile Submarines now, is largely his work. He was the Chief Scientist of the program. This is a man who spent a lot of time thinking about Deterrence. He briefed Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon. He would educate Congress on how the Missile Boats had to work first time, every time, in order to prevent Nuclear War.

He honestly believed that Reagan was flat wrong. He thought that developing a Missile Shield was destabilizing. Dr. Craven was a genius. With lots of experience. It never occurred to him that the Soviets could be spent into the Crapper. When it was suggested, he believed that it would lead to Nuclear War.

Our Ability to tap Underwater Telephone Cables is also directly attributed to him. He is the one who came up with a lot of the foundational knowledge. He helped set up the first true Spy Submarine. But in the end, he was wrong about a lot of things too. He is exactly the sort of Expert we are supposed to listen to.

I admit readily, as a teenager, I thought Reagan was dangerous with his dealings with the Russians. I was wrong. When the Berlin Wall fell I was a Soldier in the 82nd Airborne Div. I couldn’t believe it. I had spent years by this point training to fight Russians, or their Minions. I had studied their weapons, and tactics, to give me and my mates a better chance.

I was at Fort Bragg when Russians showed up, not in an attack, but as part of the new Friendship. I saw the enemy, and he wasn’t 7 feet tall, and he had already been defeated. One of the surprises was when the Russian Officers learned how well trained our Privates were. They could read maps, they could navigate by compass and map. They could repair vehicles, and understand tactical as well as strategic goals. No enlisted in the Russian Army was allowed to even consider learning that stuff. Maps were classified, and only Officers got to see them.

If you had asked me in 1988 when I enlisted, if the Russians would collapse before I made the rank of Sergeant, I would have asked if you were insane.

No one was more surprised than our own Intelligence Agencies. They didn’t see it coming either. A few dreamers thought it might happen, in another decade. It didn’t take a decade, it took a couple more years before the greatest threat to freedom in our lifetimes was eliminated.

Experts said we could win in Vietnam. Experts said the Chinese would never cross the border and join North Korea in the war. Experts said that the Russians were unstoppable. Experts said a lot of things, that turned out to be false. Oh they believed that what they said were true, but they were wrong. Right now, we are in Afghanistan, which the Experts said we would have no trouble taking and subduing.

To that end, I am not saying that the Congress Critters are right, or wrong. I am saying that the experience of Uniformed Service, and long experience, does not guarantee right choices. Instead of wringing your hands, and moaning because they didn’t serve. Find out what those Congressmen are asking, and pushing for. Are the questions wise? Or is it like Hank Johnson who asked if Guam would tip over and capsize from the additional Marines being stationed there? He really asked that. I wouldn’t care if he was a Damned 20 Star General, I would say he was an idiot from that alone. He has proven that he is dumb many times since, and I am saddened that my State of Georgia sends him back to Congress every time we vote.

Experience does not make wisdom. Lack of experience does not mean that they are wrong. I say that as what I like to call a Truth Whore. I will take truth from anyone, any source. I give weight to the Experts, but I also remember that historically, they have been wrong a lot of the time, so there is a grain of sand set in that weight.

 

[candycorn]

The biggest problem is how the Congress has organized itself - as laid out in the constitution to be their responsibility.

Each house has different rules of procedure and organization. The absolute worst about both is that longevity is used to determine positions of power within the committees.

Here's an example:

The House Armed Services Committee
The Chairman, Adam Smith, has never served one day in uniform!
The Vice Chair, Anthony Brown, dropped out of West Point but became a commissioned Army chopper pilot for 5 years
Ranking Member Mac Thorberry has never served a single day in uniform.

And these are the folk who decide what's best for our armed services.

What's wrong with that?

And, I think that explains exactly why The Washington Establishment hates President Trump so much. He didn't stand in line to wait for his turn to hold his position. He went around The Seniority System.

it’s a problem that a committee chair hasn’t served in uniform but you see no issue with a commander in chief who hasn’t? Wow...that’s retarded.

when we had statesmen the Constitution was fine. We don’t have many of them any longer. The game now is to exploit the silence of the Constitution.

the senate is almost totally useless.
Do we really need a Senate?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The biggest problem is how the Congress has organized itself - as laid out in the constitution to be their responsibility.

Each house has different rules of procedure and organization. The absolute worst about both is that longevity is used to determine positions of power within the committees.

Here's an example:

The House Armed Services Committee
The Chairman, Adam Smith, has never served one day in uniform!
The Vice Chair, Anthony Brown, dropped out of West Point but became a commissioned Army chopper pilot for 5 years
Ranking Member Mac Thorberry has never served a single day in uniform.

And these are the folk who decide what's best for our armed services.

What's wrong with that?

And, I think that explains exactly why The Washington Establishment hates President Trump so much. He didn't stand in line to wait for his turn to hold his position. He went around The Seniority System.

Why is it bad for those people to not have military service but cool for the Commander In Chief not to have any?

 

[gipper]

The system designed by the Founders was and remains brilliant. Our system represents the people, the states, and the nation at various levels.

There are times when we are districts, times when we are states, and times when we are one nation. But let me explain.

The House of Representatives was always intended to be where populist pressure was brought. These populist pressures can change quickly, and so everyone is put up for re-election every two years. They represent the people. The people within their districts. The idea behind this was that a segment of the population would be represented by these short term politicians who would then go home and report and let the people approve, re-elect them, or disapprove, and elect another.

But populist pressure is a fleeting thing, and sometimes does not take into account the best interests of the States. Thus the Senate was born. Originally the Senate was sort of like the Ambassadors from the States. These Senators would be appointed by the State Government, and serve for a few years, representing the best interests of the States to the Federal Government. This system was not quite perfect. A Governor serving four years might not be able to appoint but one single senator, and perhaps none. So the new Governors would expect the Senators to resign, and worse, getting state Legislatures to approve of the new Senators turned out to be ten times as difficult as the Founders had imagined.

Times changed, and we changed the Constitution, to tweak the original design, as intended, with a Constitutional Amendment. The founders knew that things might need to be have small tweaks, or major changes, and put forth a mechanism to do it. Setting the mechanism to a difficult to reach standard, in order to give everyone time to think about it, and insuring that the vast majority of the Country agreed.

Senators would be elected, and still serve a six year term. Yet, they would be elected by the States, the entire population of a state, to insure that the Senators continued to represent the views of the State as a whole.

Each State would have two senators, allowing people to reconsider the direction of the Federal Government at the upper house level, less often, but with far greater implications.

Finally, we are one country. The founders intended the President to speak for the Country. It is why they gave him the power over the executive Branch. The Country as a whole would elect the president. One voice, for one country.

Do you see the brilliance? Your local issues can be put forth in Washington by your Local Representative to the House of Representatives. Your State issues can be heard in Washington by your Senator. Your national issues are addressed by the President. Each one a step up, each one a level of authority greater than the one before.

Think about it. Each State only gets two Senators. All States are equal, all States are represented equally. Each district has a number of people in it, and no state may have less than one. So you could live in Wyoming where the really difficult fight is for the House of Representatives. There can be only one.

We are the United States. The President is the Chief Executive of the United States. All States. All of them, together, united. The Senator represents the entire State. The Senator from California has exactly the same voting power as the Senator from Maine, or Florida. All States are equal. All States are equally represented. None are forgotten, none are ignored, and none can be dominated by another. The Representatives are of the people, the districts. After the ONE minimum is accounted for, the rest of the people are represented by the population numbers The People are represented, as equally as possible without ignoring any. Genius.

American democracy’s Senate problem, explained

No, the Senate is not unfair. The Senate is not intended to represent the people, but the State, as a whole. No the House is not unfair, it is intended to represent the people of the districts, and there must be at least one. No, the electoral College is not unfair. It takes into account all of this. Insuring that the States are represented at the minimum, while allowing the population to be represented by a much larger value.

It insures that being a locally supported Politician does not allow you to overwhelm the entire nation. You must win more than a handful of states to win the Election. Some states matter more than others, but every single one of them matter.

Absolute Genius.

No, there is no Democracy problem in the Senate. It is exactly as intended, all of the States represented equally. We are not the Americas. We don’t elect the President of the American People. We are many things. We are one nation, fifty states, and 435 districts, all at the same time. Just as we are in reality, we are in Washington. One Nation, Fifty States, and 435 Districts.

You are wasting your time. Yes the Founders were brilliant, but they ultimately failed.

Our criminal government ignores the constitution. It has for decades, if not centuries. They commit unconditional acts every day and without consequences. Somehow the founders failed to account for crooks taking over the government.

Clearly our government is lawless.

 

[Timmy]

The biggest problem is how the Congress has organized itself - as laid out in the constitution to be their responsibility.

Each house has different rules of procedure and organization. The absolute worst about both is that longevity is used to determine positions of power within the committees.

Here's an example:

The House Armed Services Committee
The Chairman, Adam Smith, has never served one day in uniform!
The Vice Chair, Anthony Brown, dropped out of West Point but became a commissioned Army chopper pilot for 5 years
Ranking Member Mac Thorberry has never served a single day in uniform.

And these are the folk who decide what's best for our armed services.

What's wrong with that?

And, I think that explains exactly why The Washington Establishment hates President Trump so much. He didn't stand in line to wait for his turn to hold his position. He went around The Seniority System.

I think it’s better to have non military on that committee so it doesn’t become a rubber stamp .

Our government set up is fine, but it’s big money that ruins things .