The House of Representatives should be doubled in size

[Stormy Daniels]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I would be ok with that.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[SSGT Bags]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

So, you want to pay 870 people to do nothing?

 

[TNHarley]

There are some cons to consider
Would the rules of the house have to change? If so, to what?
Would they have to give more power to a few in house? Would that make lobbying easier?
Would that mean MORE legislation? <thats a big one for me>
Could they handle all the legislation? We cant increase the hours in a day. Could the states, counties and cities handle it?

 

[Harry Dresden]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

you raise a good point....but having more politicians just seems like more bullshit will come out of DC...

 

[Stormy Daniels]

There are some cons to consider
Would the rules of the house have to change? If so, to what?
Would they have to give more power to a few in house? Would that make lobbying easier?
Would that mean MORE legislation? <thats a big one for me>
Could they handle all the legislation? We cant increase the hours in a day. Could the states, counties and cities handle it?

I don't see why any of those questions would be answered with a 'yes'. Lobbying certainly won't be easier. If anything, it would become twice as difficult. It would take a lot more money to buy off double the people.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

you raise a good point....but having more politicians just seems like more bullshit will come out of DC...

As opposed to sending more quality into DC?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

you raise a good point....but having more politicians just seems like more bullshit will come out of DC...

Or maybe less, with this plan even more would have to agree to the bullshit, which might stop some of it.

The less they pass the better off we are


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Erinwltr]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

you raise a good point....but having more politicians just seems like more bullshit will come out of DC...

I think it is a great idea but come down on your side of the equation.

 

[Fang]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

So, you want to pay 870 people to do nothing?

THIS.

These asshats can't get shit done now. You want to add another several hundred to do nothing with our tax dollars? No thank you.

 

[jwoodie]

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering

I don't think so. More districts mean more opportunities to draw creative boundaries.

 

[TNHarley]

There are some cons to consider
Would the rules of the house have to change? If so, to what?
Would they have to give more power to a few in house? Would that make lobbying easier?
Would that mean MORE legislation? <thats a big one for me>
Could they handle all the legislation? We cant increase the hours in a day. Could the states, counties and cities handle it?

I don't see why any of those questions would be answered with a 'yes'. Lobbying certainly won't be easier. If anything, it would become twice as difficult. It would take a lot more money to buy off double the people.

You think there will be organizational issues when you DOUBLE something?
If the rules of the house had to change, they might need to give more power to a select few. Then, they would only have to mess with a few and the rets just fall in line.
Why wouldnt there be more legislation? You are talking about doubling or tripling the house! That only makes sense.
Double or triple the legislation wont effect localities? Do you understand what they do? What clerks have to do and know? How they have to get information out to the public?

 

[Stormy Daniels]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

you raise a good point....but having more politicians just seems like more bullshit will come out of DC...

Or maybe less, with this plan even more would have to agree to the bullshit, which might stop some of it.

The less they pass the better off we are


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Exactly. The reason so much bullshit comes out of Congress is because they aren't really accountable to the people anymore.

 

[TNHarley]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

you raise a good point....but having more politicians just seems like more bullshit will come out of DC...

Or maybe less, with this plan even more would have to agree to the bullshit, which might stop some of it.

The less they pass the better off we are


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Exactly. The reason so much bullshit comes out of Congress is because they aren't really accountable to the people anymore.

That doesnt fall back on the voters?
"well this guy dont give a shit about any of us, so lets vote him in again!"

 

[TNHarley]

What about the clerks that handle introduced legislation? We would have double or triple them too
This is really turning out to be a great idea!

 

[Moonglow]

At 435 members, the House of Representatives represents the 326 million US population at a rate of roughly one representative to every 750,000 people. This effectively guarantees the federal government will be controlled the elitist few who can ignore the will of the people all too easily. By contrast, the UK's House of Commons has 650 members for a 65.5 million population, yielding a representation ratio of approximately 100,000 to one.

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering, and improves the government's accountability to the people.

It's chaotic enough already.

 

[Moonglow]

What about the clerks that handle introduced legislation? We would have double or triple them too
This is really turning out to be a great idea!

If they work for free.

 

[TNHarley]

I understand the point in this. I just dont think thats an acceptable fix. Especially since it could end up causing many more problems.

 

[TNHarley]

Im under represented. I would be in almost any area of this country.
I dont want higher debt
I dont want higher taxes
I dont want bigger govt
I want govt to shrink
I dont want religion in schools
I am pro-choice
I want strong borders and their incentives cut off
I dont want religion in politics
I want drugs legalized
I want to get rid of protected classes
Who is going to represent me? How will increasing worthless congressman help me with my representation?

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Increasing the size of the House will allow for smaller districts, which helps to combat gerrymandering

I don't think so. More districts mean more opportunities to draw creative boundaries.

What a stupid claim. Smaller districts can't be stretched to far reaches like larger districts can be, which is how gerrymandering is done.