1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Is 435 enough

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by Salty, Nov 3, 2006.

Top Posters
  1. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    38,981
    Likes Received:
    2,616
    Faith:
    Baptist
    When the Constitution was written; it provided one represenative for each 30,000 citizens.
    Now that we have a population of 300 million, we have one represenative for each 689,655 people!

    Is it time to increase our number of represenatives?

    I would recommend the House be increased to 750 members. That would bring the ratio down to 1:400,000

    Thoughts

    Salty
     
    #1 Salty, Nov 3, 2006
  2. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,076
    Likes Received:
    1,653
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I say leave it as it. 435 are enough. It's not like they actually listen to their constituents, by and large, anyway - regardless of the number of people in their districts.
     
    #2 KenH, Nov 3, 2006
  3. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    only problem is...we can't find 435 good people. Where will we find more?

    more reps mean more gerrymandered districts, and an even more fractured congress (if that's possible)

    If the following is a hijack then ignore it...if not, it could be discussed in this thread also...

    Should we repeal the 17th amendment...and allow state legislatures to select our senators. In theory, it would bring senatorial candidates to a more local focus. What thinketh ya'll?
     
    #3 rbell, Nov 3, 2006
  4. Pete

    Pete New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2002
    Messages:
    4,345
    Likes Received:
    0
    ?!?!

    435 represenatives?

    Do any of them actually represent? :BangHead: :smilewinkgrin:


    Get rid of the lot of them...and while you are about it there are a couple of hundred taking up space Down Under too ;)
     
    #4 Pete, Nov 4, 2006
  5. NateT

    NateT Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    0
    representatives are like laws, let's work on making the ones we have work before we add more :)
     
    #5 NateT, Nov 4, 2006
  6. hillclimber1

    hillclimber1 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    2,447
    Likes Received:
    0
    We don't need more, we need more quality in the ones we send.

    Quality: Faith in Jesus Christ......Fighter for the unborn......Lover of one wife......Good father......
     
    #6 hillclimber1, Nov 4, 2006
  7. Jerome

    Jerome Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    9,838
    Likes Received:
    702
    Faith:
    Baptist
    James Madison answered your question in Federalist #55:

    "Sixty or seventy men may be more properly trusted with a given degree of power than six or seven. But it does not follow that six or seven hundred would be proportionably a better depositary. And if we carry on the supposition to six or seven thousand, the whole reasoning ought to be reversed. The truth is, that in all cases a certain number at least seems to be necessary to secure the benefits of free consultation and discussion, and to guard against too easy a combination for improper purposes; as, on the other hand, the number ought at most to be kept within a certain limit, in order to avoid the confusion and intemperance of a multitude."

    "At the expiration of twenty-five years, according to the computed rate of increase, the number of representatives will amount to two hundred, and of fifty years, to four hundred. This is a number which, I presume, will put an end to all fears arising from the smallness of the body."
     
    #7 Jerome, Nov 4, 2006
  8. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    No, to many representatives

    I propose we dissolve the Constitution and form 50 sovereign nations under the Articles of Confederacy.
     
    #8 billwald, Nov 4, 2006
  9. DeeJay

    DeeJay New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
    You cant be serious.
     
    #9 DeeJay, Nov 4, 2006
  10. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,076
    Likes Received:
    1,653
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes. :thumbs:
     
    #10 KenH, Nov 4, 2006
  11. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    38,981
    Likes Received:
    2,616
    Faith:
    Baptist

    Actually, there would only be 40 sovereign nations, as ten States would be re-organized under the Constitution of the CSA! :thumbsup:

    ink to the CSA constitution http://www.americancivilwar.com/documents/confederate_constitution.html


    Salty

    ps Save your dixie cups
     
    #11 Salty, Nov 4, 2006
  12. The Galatian

    The Galatian Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    1
    It would be attractive to some. Smaller elections are easier to rig.
     
    #12 The Galatian, Nov 4, 2006
  13. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    CSA is fine with me.

    Only secret elections can be rigged.
     
    #13 billwald, Nov 4, 2006
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...