Comments on: Expanding the House of Representatives http://dailycollegian.com/2009/10/13/expanding-the-house-of-representatives/ New England's Largest College Daily Online Fri, 18 May 2012 22:19:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Zack http://dailycollegian.com/2009/10/13/expanding-the-house-of-representatives/comment-page-1/#comment-523 Zack Tue, 20 Oct 2009 05:05:49 +0000 http://massdailycollegian.com/?p=3912#comment-523 There you go again. You have wandered off into the land of rainbows and puppies. If you think for one second that we can all of a sudden fill our congress with 5000 excellent representatives when we cannot even manage to do so with 435, then you are simply choosing to ignore reality. There would still be partisan divide, because by nature this country is partisan. There are roughly 70 million registered Democrats and 55 million registered Republicans. There are some involved independents and minority party affiliates such as the green party, but for the most part any American who chooses to be politically aware and involved in politics has some ideological leaning and political affiliation. Although being on the UMass Amherst campus might make one think that there are many green party members, independents, and other radical party groups in the U.S. it is certainly not true. Western Mass is a political anomaly and certainly is not a representative model of the U.S. Thank God! There you go again. You have wandered off into the land of rainbows and puppies. If you think for one second that we can all of a sudden fill our congress with 5000 excellent representatives when we cannot even manage to do so with 435, then you are simply choosing to ignore reality. There would still be partisan divide, because by nature this country is partisan. There are roughly 70 million registered Democrats and 55 million registered Republicans. There are some involved independents and minority party affiliates such as the green party, but for the most part any American who chooses to be politically aware and involved in politics has some ideological leaning and political affiliation. Although being on the UMass Amherst campus might make one think that there are many green party members, independents, and other radical party groups in the U.S. it is certainly not true. Western Mass is a political anomaly and certainly is not a representative model of the U.S. Thank God!

]]> By: Ben Rudnick http://dailycollegian.com/2009/10/13/expanding-the-house-of-representatives/comment-page-1/#comment-502 Ben Rudnick Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:46:46 +0000 http://massdailycollegian.com/?p=3912#comment-502 Zack, I would argue just the opposite. If you assume that the people who get elected to a much larger House of Representatives are, for the most part, good people who are dedicated to actually serving their constituents needs, then they will be well motivated to do whatever it takes to achieve that goal. As such, instead of the situation you describe, with chaos reigning and little actual work being done, the huge new crop of Reps will find that the only way of getting anything done in that environment will to to work together. That will lead to the formation of coalitions around individual issues as the lawmakers gravitate to areas in which they can agree. Instead of block voting along ideological lines based on party affiliation, I think you would see one group getting together around, for example, regulatory policies on which they agree, and then splitting apart only to form a differently constituted group around a particular education bill. Not to mention the fact that a House containing perhaps 5 or 6 thousand members would be impossible for any one or two or three or more parties to keep control of, which would tend to encourage the members to make up their own minds on each piece of legislation. Ben R. Zack,

I would argue just the opposite. If you assume that the people who get elected to a much larger House of Representatives are, for the most part, good people who are dedicated to actually serving their constituents needs, then they will be well motivated to do whatever it takes to achieve that goal. As such, instead of the situation you describe, with chaos reigning and little actual work being done, the huge new crop of Reps will find that the only way of getting anything done in that environment will to to work together. That will lead to the formation of coalitions around individual issues as the lawmakers gravitate to areas in which they can agree. Instead of block voting along ideological lines based on party affiliation, I think you would see one group getting together around, for example, regulatory policies on which they agree, and then splitting apart only to form a differently constituted group around a particular education bill. Not to mention the fact that a House containing perhaps 5 or 6 thousand members would be impossible for any one or two or three or more parties to keep control of, which would tend to encourage the members to make up their own minds on each piece of legislation.

Ben R.

]]> By: Zack http://dailycollegian.com/2009/10/13/expanding-the-house-of-representatives/comment-page-1/#comment-495 Zack Wed, 14 Oct 2009 04:09:03 +0000 http://massdailycollegian.com/?p=3912#comment-495 Although all of the points you make are fairly accurate you leave out one major argument against the increase in the size of the House of Representatives. Although we would be better represented in the House with more Representatives, the discussions within the House would likely experience an exponential increase in the amount of time needed to reach a vote. The House is already disorganized enough with 435 members, not to mention 5,000. And although it may sound like sunshine and lollipops on the outside to say that more political parties in the government is a better thing, it is certainly not so. A greater diversity in political parties will only create more faction, distress, and divisiveness in congress. I'm not saying our system is perfect, but the last thing we need is for our already ineffective government to get bigger. Although all of the points you make are fairly accurate you leave out one major argument against the increase in the size of the House of Representatives. Although we would be better represented in the House with more Representatives, the discussions within the House would likely experience an exponential increase in the amount of time needed to reach a vote. The House is already disorganized enough with 435 members, not to mention 5,000. And although it may sound like sunshine and lollipops on the outside to say that more political parties in the government is a better thing, it is certainly not so. A greater diversity in political parties will only create more faction, distress, and divisiveness in congress. I’m not saying our system is perfect, but the last thing we need is for our already ineffective government to get bigger.

]]>