Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
2,500,000 members. Thank you!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-09-2012, 08:56 AM
 
5,524 posts, read 9,895,742 times
Reputation: 1867

Advertisements

http://http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/09/opinion/flynn-expand-congress/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 (broken link)

What are people's thoughts on this? I think there are some very valid points especially in regards to the number of constituents one represents and how much that has grown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-09-2012, 09:05 AM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,711,464 times
Reputation: 12828
Yes, by all means, feed the malignant tumor which is our federal government until it completely consumes and destroys our country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 09:12 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,298,666 times
Reputation: 6541
In 1911, Congress passed the Apportionment Act of 1911, also known as 'Public Law 62-5', which capped the size of the US House of Representatives at 435 seats. Since 1911 the US population has tripled.

To be proportional representation the number of constituents per Representative must be fixed, not variable. It is the number of Representatives that must change. Currently, there is one Representative for every 716,303 people in the US. Can one Representative represent that many people? Can they represent more? Should they represent less? These are the questions we should be debating.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 09:21 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,652,590 times
Reputation: 14345
This is actually a serious problem. Our elected representatives cannot and do not represent us when their constituencies are close to 1 million people. While I respect some poster's points about growing an already outsized federal government, I have to also point out that one of the reason's lobby groups and special interests have so much sway is because an elected representative is going to be responsive to what information he gets. The organized message of lobby groups has more of an impact than the disorganized and not uniform messages of hundreds or thousands of constituents. We need to do something to make our elected representatives to the federal government more answerable to the people those representatives are supposed to represent. Expanding Congress might seem wrongheaded, and perhaps there are other solutions, but it is a problem that requires attention.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 09:22 AM
 
3,064 posts, read 2,623,923 times
Reputation: 968
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 235 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

The 545 People Responsible For All Of U.S. Woes

Nope. We don't need anymore of these guys. Nope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 09:30 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 83,971,535 times
Reputation: 27718
Yeah right. We could accomplish so much more if Congress doubled the number of people who can't agree to fight their way out of a wet paper bag but can all agree to save their private barber shop, gym and spa.

Good sound logic there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,298,666 times
Reputation: 6541
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
This is actually a serious problem. Our elected representatives cannot and do not represent us when their constituencies are close to 1 million people. While I respect some poster's points about growing an already outsized federal government, I have to also point out that one of the reason's lobby groups and special interests have so much sway is because an elected representative is going to be responsive to what information he gets. The organized message of lobby groups has more of an impact than the disorganized and not uniform messages of hundreds or thousands of constituents. We need to do something to make our elected representatives to the federal government more answerable to the people those representatives are supposed to represent. Expanding Congress might seem wrongheaded, and perhaps there are other solutions, but it is a problem that requires attention.
I agree, it is a serious problem. Increasing the size of the US House will also change the number of Electors sent by the State Legislatures to the Electoral College.

How many people can a US Representative effectively represent? If we accept that 700,000 people is too many, would 500,000 be any better? In 1911 there were fewer than 250,000 per US Representative. If we had one US Representative for every 250,000 citizens, there would be 1,246 US Representatives. There would also be 1,349 (counting the 3 for DC) Electoral College votes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 10:27 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,652,590 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
I agree, it is a serious problem. Increasing the size of the US House will also change the number of Electors sent by the State Legislatures to the Electoral College.

How many people can a US Representative effectively represent? If we accept that 700,000 people is too many, would 500,000 be any better? In 1911 there were fewer than 250,000 per US Representative. If we had one US Representative for every 250,000 citizens, there would be 1,246 US Representatives. There would also be 1,349 (counting the 3 for DC) Electoral College votes.
Obviously there are numerous issues that have to be considered. I don't think the number of Electoral College votes is as pressing an issue as, for instance, the issue of just how to house the additional representatives and their staff. I worry that I and many others get bogged down by our ways of thinking about this problem. We have so much new technology at our disposal, and when it comes to government legislatures, federal and state, we don't use it. Do our Congressional members have to have a designated office in DC as well as offices in their home districts. Why not have those offices open to whichever representatives are in DC, with a staff on hand to serve them? Do our Congressional members have to be present in DC to vote? Why not let them vote electronically? As large as our country has become, would it be worth considering a third tier of the legislature? I'm just tossing this idea out, I haven't really thought it through, but what if you had a third tier that exclusively proposed legislation, and then the House and Senate hashed out the actual laws? That third tier could be tied to a much smaller number of constituents, and not even have offices in DC. Just boon-doggling a little, here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 10:41 AM
 
5,524 posts, read 9,895,742 times
Reputation: 1867
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Obviously there are numerous issues that have to be considered. I don't think the number of Electoral College votes is as pressing an issue as, for instance, the issue of just how to house the additional representatives and their staff. I worry that I and many others get bogged down by our ways of thinking about this problem. We have so much new technology at our disposal, and when it comes to government legislatures, federal and state, we don't use it. Do our Congressional members have to have a designated office in DC as well as offices in their home districts. Why not have those offices open to whichever representatives are in DC, with a staff on hand to serve them? Do our Congressional members have to be present in DC to vote? Why not let them vote electronically? As large as our country has become, would it be worth considering a third tier of the legislature? I'm just tossing this idea out, I haven't really thought it through, but what if you had a third tier that exclusively proposed legislation, and then the House and Senate hashed out the actual laws? That third tier could be tied to a much smaller number of constituents, and not even have offices in DC. Just boon-doggling a little, here.
Excellent points. Just on travel, accommodations and office overhead alone I am sure that a pretty penny could be saved. It's hard for our politicians to represent us when they aren't even around here to listen to the wants and needs of the people. They are protected by sitting hundreds or thousands of miles away.

If the people who are supposed to represent us are much closer and are more readily accessible then their constituents can get in touch with them easy and actually get word to them on how we want them to vote. They are voted into office and then vote based on what will benefit them financially as well as get them re-elected. It's not a very good system especially with the amount of technology there is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 10:43 AM
 
5,524 posts, read 9,895,742 times
Reputation: 1867
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Yeah right. We could accomplish so much more if Congress doubled the number of people who can't agree to fight their way out of a wet paper bag but can all agree to save their private barber shop, gym and spa.

Good sound logic there.
Right now they have a stranglehold on the current system. If the system grows it will allow for more independents, moderates and others to join in and give better representation the the people of this country.

Does better representation sound like good logic to you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top