This conversation started after a video that shows Senator Demint exposing Congress passing bills left and right without debate or vote
Michael W The republicans would do the same! Again, we need more representation. I will extend this as well. Not only do we need more than 435 House members, but we need more more than 100 US Senators.
Eric O I want. A listing of those bills please
Judy M Me too Eric! I do know that a lot of stuff gets passed with unanimous consent and no recorded votes.
Checkout: thirty-thousand.org to find out more about Michael Warnken’s comment.
Phil D just this am, dumbo stated that the gop is refusing transparency for who pays for the political ads… just another reason to replace this disease in Nov…
Michael W Benjamin Franklin once said “It is a Maxim in Law to know who is spending your money and why!”
Michael W. – I disagree. We do not need any more representation. We just need the ones we put in office already to do their job.
Michael W. @Patriot S. We need many more. That is the most important issue out there.
You need to get educated on this topic.
George Washington said 30,000 was representation and 40,000 was tyranny. Today, each US House member represents 700,000+ people. That is over 20 times what they should be representing or 15 times tyranny!
Wendy L liked and shared
Nena E. If 30,000 was about enough people to be represented by one US House member; and today each rep represents 700,000+ then Michael Warnken’s statement makes sense. More members representing smaller groups of people does not necessarily means more big government, it would mean that the people will be more in control, the reps will be better known and easier to have access to. Think of it like a family, which parents will the children have more access to, the parents with 15 kids or the parents with 2?
Nena E. As it is hardly anybody’s letter or fax is literally read by his or her rep, let alone have a meeting with their rep!
Nena E. If you think about it, centralization of government results when there is not enough voices that will listen and vouch for the people. Viewing it from the top (big government) is easier to control a few than too many! But if there were more reps and senators, they (big government) will not be able to control the many reps and senators!
Nena E. With more reps and senators, government will slow dow!
Judy M. Nena, just think if we could only dream….. With technology nobody needs to be in DC and we could tether them to their district offices where they can write legislation, debate and vote electronically, all under the watchful eyes of their constituents. It would be cost prohibitive for lobbyist to buy them!
Michael is right, we need more representation and I also support term limits and massively reduced compensation.
Michael E. Exactly! It is essential to add more reps to decentralize power. This is why everything is so screwed up today.
Nena E. I agree, most people have been looking at this from the wrong angle. With more representation people will have more control over legislation!
Nena E. States will have control over the feds! And not the other way around!
Nena E. Those who can’t see it, need to take a look at Venezuela!
Michael W. Now, how do I spread this message to more people?
Nena E. One way is to get in online forums!
Nena E. That’s a cheap way to do it!
Michael W. I spread it as often as I can. I can only hope that people like you spread it around!