Eric Ingemunson, prolific conservative blogger, has a new post discussing the size of the House of Representatives and the impacts of keeping it at 435.
Click here to read it.
It isn't often that The Reapportionment Act of 1929 and Public Law 62-5 are bought into our modern political conversations but it made for a very interesting read. I hadn't heard of 62-5 before but The Reapportionment Act of 1929 has been an interest of mine.
Go read the article and leave him a few comments here as feedback. I don't agree often with his opinions but I have so far been impressed with a few of his fair comments he has put in his entries. I am likely to regret saying that but it is true. For example: He said it was fair Democrats gave priority to their club members to get in a packed event at a recent Democratic Club meeting on healthcare instead of complaining, like some other people did.
My first question for Eric: Are you, as a conservative, really pushing to dramatically expand the numbers of politicians?
Yes! I'm not pushing the number of politicians per se, but rather I want to see an increase in representation by shrinking Congressional districts. This would result in more politicians, yes, but each one would have to be more responsive to the people because as district size decreases, accountability increases.
To demonstrate that principle, who do you have more sway over? A city councilmember or the POTUS?
The notion of shrinking districts is purely academic and unlikely ever to gain traction, but it's interesting to understand why politicians feel that it's safe to ignore the wishes of their constituents.
This is Eric's response regarding his blog on the Finger Biting incident. Care to comment on Joel Angeles, Audra's STrickland's Chief of Staff, hammering on an elderly man? He is being tried right now.
civil war
I just had to respond to BillyBob's ignorance and total lack of social grace. His vague reference to what he suggested was democracy much more closely resembles what the rest of us would call anarchy. This is typical of the half-cocked mentality that resides on the left fringe of society, having all the answers but but being woefully uninformed. The suggestion that the "old Fart" who was viciously attacked deserved to lose his finger says a lot about the unchecked anger that these crazy liberal types have for anyone who disagrees with them. What ever happened to civil discourse? There's nothing wrong with people standing up for what they believe, especially during a time when the political establishment is trying to shove something down their throats instead of representing them the in the manner to which they avowed. These are truly some of the most frightening times that I've ever seen in my sixty years as an American citizen... may God help us all!
Submitted by Eric on Thu, 09/03/09 - 05:06 PM » reply |
Just to be clear, the "Eric" that "Eric Who" quotes is not me. It's a different Eric. It's a common name.
It doesn't matter how big the district is if you have a Congressman like Elton Gallegly who doesn't have town hall meetings or show up to debates during a time of war.
Maybe the fact the district is so big is the reason he hides. If he met with the east end of the district he would have to meet with north end. That could really affect his ability to enjoy his Republican Congressman lifestyle.
By the same reasoning, over whom would a $1000 campaign donation have more sway...a congressman representing 450,000 constituents or one representing, say, 50,000?
gs - yes, the $1000 campaign donation would have more sway over the congressman representing 50,000 people.
However, a solitary congressman would have almost no power. The donor would have to donate to hundreds of congressmen to have any effect, and what seems like a cheap buyoff suddenly gets very expensive.
Furthermore, if someone is able to bribe the congressman and he stops being responsive to his constituents, he can easily be replaced when he's about as powerful as a city councilman.
The real problem with shrinking districts is fitting all the extra congressmen into the Capitol Building...
I can't disagree with you.
Topical news from today's New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/us/politics/18baker.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
*****
One Person, One Vote? Not in Congress
The difference this time, Mr. Farris said, is that the courts have not considered the proposed remedy of ordering Congress to increase the size of the House: “Nobody’s ever asked them before.”
Now they’re asking.
*****
Why do I get the feeling Eric hasn't run any of these ideas by the VCRCC?
Yes, Eric Who, he was tried and found not guilty. Anything more to say, moron? No, I didn't think so.