USMB Political Hackery

Discussion in 'Congress' started by Samson, Oct 20, 2012.

  1. regent
    Offline

    regent Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Messages:
    8,808
    Thanks Received:
    957
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,077
    Perhaps, start with ending gerrymandering.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. JimH52
    Offline

    JimH52 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    21,443
    Thanks Received:
    3,436
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    US
    Ratings:
    +10,557
    But Gerrymandering and Voter Suppression are the two most effective GOP tools.
     
  3. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    17,528
    Thanks Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +5,581
    If we organized local democratic representation so we could base public policy on consensus of all voters, taxpayers and property owners affected, what difference would it make who is in office, how long they have served, or how the boundaries are cut? If policies are made by resolving conflicts instead of bullying over any opposition, what would matter is the content and the writing of the policies, regardless who represents what.
     
  4. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,741
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,218

    So the more reps in the HoR the Bigger the "Mess?" Gotchya.

    We just need one rep?

    All I'm saying is that having One representative for every 700,000 Americans probably doesn't allow constituents to have as much influence over the representative as One representative for every 70,000 Americans, or One representative for every 7,000 Americans. I'm not against representative federal government, but I'd like to make the ratio the size the last time it was changed: 1910!
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,741
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,218
    Yes as long as the same number of people were forced to live within each square.
     
  6. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    17,528
    Thanks Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +5,581
    I would create a third unofficial house of Congress, where people can represent issues by party.
    And then issue statements by consensus among the parties, listing points of agreement and dissension.

    These position papers could then be presented to the official members and committees of Congress
    to make reforms according to solutions all sides agree on, and to avoid mandating beliefs anyone is against.
     
  7. candycorn
    Offline

    candycorn Alis volat propriis

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    40,025
    Thanks Received:
    4,810
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +13,427
    Time to expand it. No doubt. What is the mechanism for doing that??
     
  8. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,741
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,218
    In 1929 Congress (Republican control of both houses of congress and the presidency) passed the Reapportionment Act of 1929 which capped the size of the House at 435 (the then current number).

    Another bill would need to be made law.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    24,149
    Thanks Received:
    2,826
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +6,731
    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.
     
  10. Samson
    Offline

    Samson Póg Mo Thóin Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    27,357
    Thanks Received:
    3,741
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    A Higher Plain
    Ratings:
    +4,218
    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.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

usmb political