USMB Political Hackery

[konradv]

I wouldn't want to increase the number of representatives until we change the way their elections are financed. Greater numbers would just mean more corruption, as they sell their votes for campaign contributions. If public financing were in effect, they'd have to listen to the public, not special interests.

Greater numbers of reps mean fewer constituents. Fewer constituents mean campaigns are less costly. Less costly campaigns rely less on money. Less Money means Less corruption.

I doubt the product of 'representatives X money' would go down. IMO, the equation would still be 'money = corruption'.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I doubt this thread will get much play because it challenges the USMB membership to think beyond their usual lemming limits of following whatever partisan hack's blog they read every single fucking hour, but here goes;

The HoR has had the same number of members since 1910.

I know some of you may want me to post a link to evidence supporting my contention that the US population has grown since 1910, but let's just use our imaginations for a moment.

This population change means each US representative, Dem OR Repub, has an average 770,000 constituants.

Realistically, there is no fucking way these guys are representing this many people: No other representative body on the face of the planet has such an absurd ratio.

If you really cared about the validity or representative government, then you'd stop the political hackary, and demand that congress vote to triple the size (at minimum) the number of representatives in the HoR.

Of course, this would open wide the door for MORE that BiPartisan government....hell, we might even be able to form an effective third party: GOD FORBID!!!

The population of Rhode Island is a little over one million; the population of the San Francisco Bay Area is a little over nine million.

Two Senators represent RI, two Senators represent not only SFBA but the metro areas of LA and San Diego and the rural areas to our far north and east of the Sierras.

I agree with the OP, enough is enough - these two bodies have done enough damage putting party / ideology over country.

Each new member and each reelected member ought to take an oath to act pragmatically, and act in accordance with what's good for the nation, not themselves or those who give them the largest amount of money.