Expanded House of Representatives

[Padfoot]

Do a map of 2000.

Yeah, because nine ******* years later you people still can't get over that.

Imagine if Ted Kennedy had half of his brain removed and then lost the popular vote to John McCain in 2000, but Kennedy still gets to be president from 2001-2009 and perhaps you'll understand why.

The Bush administration was an unmitigated disaster that bears nearly full responsibility for the domestic and international mess we're in.  If anything, Gore supporters have more right to be pissed now than they did when the election Supreme Court decision occurred.

As for the question at hand about expanding the House, I'm definitely in favor of it.  Montana, with nearly 1 million people should have at least 2 representatives in the House.  I also think that any state whose delegation constitutes more than 10% of the total House membership should be strongly encouraged to split into multiple states.

[Padfoot]

Only 669   Besides, more House members means fewer career politicians.

By that do you mean more career politicians? Think of every career politician who narrowly lost a vote; surely there are a couple hundred out there to flesh out your new HOR.

The best way to get of career politicians is to stop paying them six-figure salaries.  I say we fix their pay to the minimum wage in some way.  Perhaps their salary should be equivalent to a minimum wage earner's income times four assuming he works 40 hours a week all year.

[Padfoot]

Only 669   Besides, more House members means fewer career politicians.

By that do you mean more career politicians? Think of every career politician who narrowly lost a vote; surely there are a couple hundred out there to flesh out your new HOR.

The best way to get of career politicians is to stop paying them six-figure salaries.  I say we fix their pay to the minimum wage in some way.  Perhaps their salary should be equivalent to a minimum wage earner's income times four assuming he works 40 hours a week all year.

Congress is a full-year endeavor, so slashing the pay will reduce the pool of members to those with an independent source of income. Those will generally be the wealthy or comfortably retired.

Build a Congressional dorm where they can all live and pay for a certain amount of travel based on their district or state's distance from DC.  They already have a posh health care plan and free mail.  What other expenses can they possibly be racking up that would prevent them from living reasonably off of a $50,000-$75,000 salary?