Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mean Daddy

>>Really good article from Jonah Goldberg from 2001. I agree with his premise that congress should be larger to be more representative of the will of the people. When the country was born, the population ratio was 1 to 30,000. Today, it’s 1 to 600,000!!<<

Do you really want the House to be 2,000-5,000 representatives?

That would be unwieldy to say the least. I am all for gridlock, but since the House controls the purse strings nothing would ever get financed, even the good stuff.


10 posted on 01/15/2017 8:00:38 AM PST by freedumb2003 (obozo: not just the worst president in American history - worst *American* in American history (turf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: freedumb2003; Mean Daddy

>
>>Really good article from Jonah Goldberg from 2001. I agree with his premise that congress should be larger to be more representative of the will of the people. When the country was born, the population ratio was 1 to 30,000. Today, it’s 1 to 600,000!!<<

Do you really want the House to be 2,000-5,000 representatives?

That would be unwieldy to say the least. I am all for gridlock, but since the House controls the purse strings nothing would ever get financed, even the good stuff.
>

Care to define ‘the good stuff’? My copy contains *VERY* little Congress need ‘worry’ about to begin.

IMO, nothing should be done until the 17th is abolished. Even so, I see nothing wrong w/ a better ratio of representation.

Nobody would be saying the same % would be just swell if it came to doctors or the check-out lines.


30 posted on 01/15/2017 9:08:20 AM PST by i_robot73 ("A man chooses. A slave obeys." - Andrew Ryan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003
Do you really want the House to be 2,000-5,000 representatives?

That would be unwieldy to say the least.

It would make alot of sense, but only if you gutted the entire rule making part of the executive bureaucracy and replaced them with congressman and their small staffs. Congressional committees would become issuers of regulation. Every government rule would be an act of congress. So you might still have a Department of the Interior, but they could not write rules or issue regulations. The could only enforce what they were given by Congress.

35 posted on 01/15/2017 9:29:55 AM PST by Poison Pill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003
Do you really want the House to be 2,000-5,000 representatives?

That would not be an awful idea if Representative were a part-time job and Congress weren't in session most of the time.

The New Hampshire House of Representatives is 400 members, the third largest in the English-speaking world, and members get $200 (and free use of state toll roads) for their two year term. Nobody thinks of State Representative as a full-time job.

Of course, in a country the size of the United States, that wouldn't be possible. Hotel bills for when Congress was in session would be enormous.

55 posted on 01/15/2017 10:46:04 AM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: freedumb2003

In Ukraine their legislature the Verkovna Rada represents the nineteen regions of the country. It has 400 members. Your point is well made.


62 posted on 01/15/2017 12:16:08 PM PST by Jimmy Valentine (DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson