Presidential Pardon Predictions ?

I would like to see less people per Representative, however one argument against it is that the more Representatives you have, the less gets done.

Can you imagine if the numbers were the same as when we made the Constitution? I believe 30 or 35 thousand per Representative.

Lets say 30k . That would be 10000 members in the House of Representatives. Now imagine trying to pay them all, much less getting any meeting held and any consenus on any bill.

lol ... that would be pretty outrageous ...

maybe I'll run some numbers later on if it stays slow here and see what it would look like at 500,000 per Rep and some other numbers ...

another possible reason why it has stayed the same is that with fewer seats it is easier to maintain the Republican and Democratic brand name and avoid 3rd party representation ...
 
lol ... that would be pretty outrageous ...

maybe I'll run some numbers later on if it stays slow here and see what it would look like at 500,000 per Rep and some other numbers ...

another possible reason why it has stayed the same is that with fewer seats it is easier to maintain the Republican and Democratic brand name and avoid 3rd party representation ...

500k is easy, we have approximately 300 million people that would be 600 Representatives. That is close to what we have now. That is in fact a number I was thinking would be acceptable.

And your right 600 Representatives with 500k per would mean more chance of someone other then the 2 getting elected.

But it would be a nightmare in the making as the way districts work is the States make them and party in power gerrymanders them every 10 years. Republican controlled States would gerrymander so most of the districts were Republican while Democrat controlled States would gerrymander so that most were Democratic districts.

Further it would favor Urban centers and probably short change rural areas.
 
500k is easy, we have approximately 300 million people that would be 600 Representatives. That is close to what we have now. That is in fact a number I was thinking would be acceptable.

And your right 600 Representatives with 500k per would mean more chance of someone other then the 2 getting elected.

But it would be a nightmare in the making as the way districts work is the States make them and party in power gerrymanders them every 10 years. Republican controlled States would gerrymander so most of the districts were Republican while Democrat controlled States would gerrymander so that most were Democratic districts.

Further it would favor Urban centers and probably short change rural areas.

That's a good point ... at 500k/rep California would gain 20 seats ... Texas would gain 16 ... but Wyoming would stay the same ... a state like Nevada would only gain 2 ...
 
500k is easy, we have approximately 300 million people that would be 600 Representatives. That is close to what we have now. That is in fact a number I was thinking would be acceptable.

And your right 600 Representatives with 500k per would mean more chance of someone other then the 2 getting elected.

But it would be a nightmare in the making as the way districts work is the States make them and party in power gerrymanders them every 10 years. Republican controlled States would gerrymander so most of the districts were Republican while Democrat controlled States would gerrymander so that most were Democratic districts.

Further it would favor Urban centers and probably short change rural areas.
make it so district must follow natural(rivers, lakes, etc) or political(city/county lines) borders would solve that problem
 
That's a good point ... at 500k/rep California would gain 20 seats ... Texas would gain 16 ... but Wyoming would stay the same ... a state like Nevada would only gain 2 ...
lets also remember how it would change the electoral college
;)
 
lets also remember how it would change the electoral college
;)

I've been running some numbers based on the 500k/rep figure ... I've only jotted the numbers for the top 13 populous states and it looks like it would heavily sway the electoral map in favor of the dems ... so far ...

I'll keep playing ...but I got about an hour or so of actual "work" I gotta do ...
 
I've been running some numbers based on the 500k/rep figure ... I've only jotted the numbers for the top 13 populous states and it looks like it would heavily sway the electoral map in favor of the dems ... so far ...

I'll keep playing ...but I got about an hour or so of actual "work" I gotta do ...
of course it would
but, i would like to have added to this that electoral college votes be done based on the vote results of each congressional distric to get the 1 EC vote and the state as a whole for the at large EC(2) votes
 
of course it would
but, i would like to have added to this that electoral college votes be done based on the vote results of each congressional distric to get the 1 EC vote and the state as a whole for the at large EC(2) votes

I agree!

Your way sounds a lot more like democracy to me.
 
also need to have each state enact a 50% +1 rule for ALL elections
that would mean you could vote for a 3rd party and unless over 50% wanted one of the major party candidates, you would have a run off with the top 2 vote getters
i know if we had that this year, my first vote would go to Constitution party
 
You have no concept of our Government. The President has Veto power to place a check on the Congress, Congress can, if the muster the votes over ride his Veto to place checks on the President.

We have three Branches with 3 different powers that work to offset each other in game of checks and balances.

It really is a simple concept, but then no one has claimed you are very bright anyway.

I know exactly how your govt works. So you give one guy the power to veto the will of several others. As I said, too much power for one person...If you gave the power to Congress and then the Senate that would be much fairer. As for Judicial, why they are even involved is beyond me. Most people from most political persuasions hate the idea of legislating from the bench..

As for not being bright, it is a cross I have to bear, Einstein...
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top