Posted on 01/03/2017 2:14:36 AM PST by Jacquerie
As opposed to corruption of the US Senate, I’ve paid little attention over the course of this blog to the House of Representatives. The House isn’t involved with high profile treaties or appointments, and is far too infrequently involved with impeachments. Aside from hoping it doesn’t fall into democratic hands, it’s just sort of “there.” We dutifully vote every two years for the congressman of our choice, and that seems to be that.
While few today give much thought to the topic of representation, it was high on the list of concerns during the Framing era. At the federal convention, it occupied much of June, and wasn’t settled until the very last day, on September 17th 1787.
Representation of the component members of society is the sine-qua-non of republics. The perceived inadequacy of representation of the people in our Constitution was the first objection from Anti-Federalists, who asked, “How can the people, in a nation expected to grow into many millions, be represented in one chamber?”
Voter Qualifications. Unlike today, one-man-one-vote was of little concern in the English House of Commons, as well as our colonial and early state governments, where the people as constituted in thinly populated counties and towns of widely unequal populations, were the basic blocks of representation. By 1787, attitudes about the franchise had evolved toward its expansion, yet many blamed Shays’ Rebellion on too much democracy and its levelling spirit. On August 7th, Gouverneur Morris thought an expansive electoral base invited aristocracy, because wealthy and designing men would purchase votes readily for sale by shiftless men without a stake in the system.
Others, like James Madison, and Ben Franklin, argued the foundation of the American republic should be wide and strong, and warned that congress
(Excerpt) Read more at articlevblog.com ...
Article V ping!
Many decades ago the House abdicated that power to the executive branch.
Can and should the power of the House be restored?
I don’t know if it is possible. Restoration of the House is a tall order. Both chambers of congress have been so corrupted from their Constitutional purposes, I doubt many members have a clue as to the extent of the corruption.
The way I see it, technology has overcome the limitations of large districts to some extent, but they still need to be made smaller. I propose a doubling of the number of Representatives after each census until the number of people in each district shrinks to 100,000.
The way the Constitution lays out Congressional districts, with the district boundaries having to be within state lines, large districts represent people unevenly, with some districts having as few as 500,000 people, and others having as many as 1,000,000. With roughly 100,000 people per district, on the other hand, such population differences wouldn’t be anywhere nearly as extreme.
Combined General and Maryland “Freak State” PING!
Yes. The House is the people's house, and tax and spending bills deal with the people's money, so it would be nice if tax and spending bills originated in the House once again.
The ostensible reason the size of the House was capped at 435 was the size of the chamber.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.