Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
I have read your Q8, and find that the flaw is you aren't citing any more than regurgitating your opinion via a spam link. Please do us the courtesy and quote your information here. ...
You currently have 435 who currenlty aren't what makes several hundred more, that much more responsible?
|
There is over a half a gig of information on the TTO web site. It is available to those who have an
open mind and a
desire to learn. I cannot possibly begin to include the mass of information in a little posting. You see, some arguments won't fit on a bumper sticker, and so they require a little effort to understand.
For example, related to the question you are raising, here is 10 page article (PDF):
CONSTITUENCY SIZE AND GOVERNMENT SPENDING which was published in "Public Finance Review" 1999 (not by me). There are several more articles which can be found listed at the bottom of this page:
http://www.thirty-thousand.org/pages/Why_435.htm
You really should spend a little more time
thoughtfully considering the arguments being made in these documents as
then you would appear to be open minded.
In these postings, I'm not hoping to convince the unconvincable. Instead, I'm only attempting to find people who do
not regard
435 as a sacrosanct number, and those who are
not wedded to being ruled by an oligarchy that is largely controlled by special interests. As for the rest of you, please continue to protest
real change; I'm enjoying it immensely.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by loquitur
Dunno, guys, with more representatives you have more hands in the trough. The amount of pork will increase exponentially and there will be fewer constraints because there will be more people looking to deal and thus more deals available.
|
OK, loquitur, I see we got past the "discourse" thing. Regarding pork, please read the paper referenced above (if you
really want to understand this). It substantiates the point (previously revealed to me through
common sense) that the closer the Representatives are to the people, the less they are a country club, and the less likely they will be to build
bridges to nowhere, etc.