Gerrymandering in Virginia

#1,051
#1,051
whodeycin85 said:
In another thread you espoused the founder where worried about too much centralized power...if your willing to explain how this particular plan would give power back to the citizens without being corrupted for power like history has shown?
Click to expand...
I dont recall that exchange.

But i do firmly believe this has a good chance to bring power back to the citizens. Corruption is inherently curtailed because of the sheer number of people in the House. FYI, I don't believe corruption can be completely eliminated under any system.
 
#1,054
#1,054
McDad said:
I dont recall that exchange.

But i do firmly believe this has a good chance to bring power back to the citizens. Corruption is inherently curtailed because of the sheer number of people in the House. FYI, I don't believe corruption can be completely eliminated under any system.
Click to expand...
We were discussing homogeneity....
 
#1,055
#1,055
McDad said:
No sir! Returning to appointment by the State rather than by vote is needed though.
Click to expand...
I just have problems with New Hampshire, Rhode island,Vermont, South and North Dakota having a total of 12 senators but with a smaller combined population than California.
 
#1,057
#1,057
McDad said:
I apologize. I tend to not remember convos here from one day to another with A few exceptions.
I believe you. I just dont recollect.
Click to expand...
No need to apologize.. 😂
What brought about the change...what specific in your research led to this?? Was it just about availability of representation??
 
#1,058
#1,058
swampfoxfan said:
I just have problems with New Hampshire, Rhode island,Vermont, South and North Dakota having a total of 12 senators but with a smaller combined population than California.
Click to expand...
You'll have to reconcile your problems, then. Founders set that up intentionally. Vermont has equal standing with California relative to their relationship with the Fed.

Congress reps people.
Senate reps their state.
Prez reps the country.

A beautiful plan until we screwed it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Weezer, Rickyvol77 and 4 others
#1,059
#1,059
whodeycin85 said:
No need to apologize.. 😂
What brought about the change...what specific in your research led to this?? Was it just about availability of representation??
Click to expand...
I stumbled upon this idea about a decade ago. Dismissed it just as 423 did in this thread. I can't blame him at all.

The more I studied it, the more I understood and agreed with the potential benefits.
 
#1,063
#1,063
trout-vol said:
If the federal government wasn't so large and the power was transferred to States and local government, America's would have better representation. The federal government would be smaller. It should be that a presidential election shouldn't matter that much, because the states have more power and can be held accountable better than the federal government
Click to expand...
I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but this is an idea floated to improve the representation citizens get in Washington.
 
#1,064
#1,064
whodeycin85 said:
In another thread you espoused the founder where worried about too much centralized power...if your willing to explain how this particular plan would give power back to the citizens without being corrupted for power like history has shown?
Click to expand...
I wonder what changes the founders would propose if they had been filled in on the happenings of the last 250 years?
 
#1,065
#1,065
OHvol40 said:
I wonder what changes the founders would propose if they had been filled in on the happenings of the last 250 years?
Click to expand...
Individually or as a group?

I asked because I find them together better as a group than individuals. Common for a founder to work on expansion of the federal after they were elected. As a group expressed amazing ideas of freedom of people but held slaves.

The total was definitely better than the sum of the parts to me.
 
#1,067
#1,067
McDad said:
Individually or as a group?

I asked because I find them together better as a group than individuals. Common for a founder to work on expansion of the federal after they were elected. As a group expressed amazing ideas of freedom of people but held slaves.

The total was definitely better than the sum of the parts to me.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, as individuals they were all flawed, but the collective really did something beautiful. A lesson we should take to heart right about now.

The variety of ideas and perspectives, along with spirited, sincere, thoughtful debate gave birth to one of the best governmental systems in history.

I ponder, with the benefit of hindsight, what would Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, etc do differently from the beginnning, if anything. Also, what adjustments would they make now?

What would they say about citizens united? What would they say about all of the amendments enacted? What would they say about the two party system as it currently stands? All of it (too much to mention). I ponder this often. I do the same with Teddy Roosevelt (I’m admittedly a fanboy).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol, volfanhill and McDad
#1,069
#1,069
OHvol40 said:
Absolutely, as individuals they were all flawed, but the collective really did something beautiful. A lesson we should take to heart right about now.

The variety of ideas and perspectives, along with spirited, sincere, thoughtful debate gave birth to one of the best governmental systems in history.

I ponder, with the benefit of hindsight, what would Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, etc do differently from the beginnning, if anything. Also, what adjustments would they make now?

What would they say about citizens united? What would they say about all of the amendments enacted? What would they say about the two party system as it currently stands? All of it (too much to mention). I ponder this often. I do the same with Teddy Roosevelt (I’m admittedly a fanboy).
Click to expand...
I think they would be absolutely disgusted at how the legislative branch has just ceded power to the executive branch

I think they would be disgusted at how the states have allowed the Federal Governkent to have so much power

I think they would be mostly fine with the admendments. They created the process to make changes and they were followed

Think they would be disgusted by citizens united
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol, 85SugarVol, hog88 and 2 others
#1,070
#1,070
volfanhill said:
I think they would be absolutely disgusted at how the legislative branch has just ceded power to the executive branch

I think they would be disgusted at how the states have allowed the Federal Governkent to have so much power

I think they would be mostly fine with the admendments. They created the process to make changes and they were followed

Think they would be disgusted by citizens united
Click to expand...
We are pretty much in agreement. With a recent back and forth I had on Lincoln’s legacy, I wonder how they would reflect on that and the civil war as well. I’m willing to bet they would shame the actions of both conservatives and progressives at times.

On a side note, If anyone here hasn’t read the letters published written between Jefferson and Adams, it’s a must-read IMO. Great insights, disagreements, philosophical conversation, personal items… just great stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and volfanhill
#1,071
#1,071
McDad said:
The root of the problem is not gerrymandering. The root is there are too few districts and too few reps for constituents. At the establishment of the constitution, there was one rep for about 30,000 citizens. To follow that design, we need about 12,000 congressional reps. There are 435 currently.
Click to expand...
12,000 representatives??

IMG_1250.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#1,072
#1,072
swampfoxfan said:
I just have problems with New Hampshire, Rhode island,Vermont, South and North Dakota having a total of 12 senators but with a smaller combined population than California.
Click to expand...
Senate doesn’t represent the citizenry. That is the role of the House, and why California has more Representatives than the states mentioned combined.

Senate represents the States. They are all equal, irrespective of population. Which is what the founders wanted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rikberry31 and EasternVol
#1,073
#1,073
volfanhill said:
I think they would be absolutely disgusted at how the legislative branch has just ceded power to the executive branch

I think they would be disgusted at how the states have allowed the Federal Governkent to have so much power

I think they would be mostly fine with the admendments. They created the process to make changes and they were followed

Think they would be disgusted by citizens united
Click to expand...
Agree with the first two points on legislative branch ceding power to the executive, and states ceding power to the federal.

I think they would take issue with subsequent interpretation of what exactly the 10th amendment means. I do not think they would like what has already been done to the Senate, and would be aghast at recent proposals to apportion senators based on population size.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and volfanhill
#1,074
#1,074
OHvol40 said:
We are pretty much in agreement. With a recent back and forth I had on Lincoln’s legacy, I wonder how they would reflect on that and the civil war as well. I’m willing to bet they would shame the actions of both conservatives and progressives at times.

On a side note, If anyone here hasn’t read the letters published written between Jefferson and Adams, it’s a must-read IMO. Great insights, disagreements, philosophical conversation, personal items… just great stuff.
Click to expand...
Thomas Jefferson would not have been amused by Lincoln’s antics. Hamilton likely would have been a huge fanboy.

Did you watch the HBO series John Adams? It was excellent imo, and explored the complex relationship between Adams and Jefferson.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Rickyvol77 and OHvol40
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top