Why Do We Have the Same Number of Representatives That We had 100 years ago?

In the constitution the duty of assigning the number of representatives is granted to Congress. The constitution states "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative."

A proposed amendment included in the original package of amendments now known as the Bill of Rights capped the number of individuals one representative could represent at 50,000. 

The last time a full apportionment including increasing sets raised the number of members of the house of representatives at 433. This was in 1911, and we have only increased the number to 435 by adding the states of Hawaii and Alaska. When the permanent apportionment act was passed in 1929, the US population was approximately 121,767,000. US population is expected to shortly climb to above 330 million individuals. At that time it meant each representative represented about 281,000 people. Now each representative in the House represents over 758,000 individuals. Is it no surprise that members of Congress are often very out of touch with the individuals they represent? 

How does this stack up to the rest of the world though? We are the worst in the world for representation. The next worst is Japan at one representative per 272,000. The graphic below from Vox shows clearly why the US house desperately needs to be expanded to increase our nation's democracy. If the US had the same proportions as Japan we would have 1223 representatives. 

Congress this year had the ability to increase this number to make us more representative, but once again we have pushed off a desperate need. One proposal referred to as the "Wyoming rule" would make the smallest state by population, Wyoming be the basis for the smallest district possible. This would increase the size of the US House of Representatives to 573, or one representative per 575,000 individuals. This more modest proposal would help to fix the many issues, but we need to do more to uncap the house and make our democracy more representative of our nation, and more accessible to individuals.

What about the house chambers? They couldn't handle that number right? Well, rarely are all members of the house in the chambers, but the capitol was specifically designed by George Washington with it's large dome with the intent that it would expand as needed. Temporarily new members could be in the gallery if needed for the State of the Union and other major speeches. Other accommodations such as secured distance voting could also be allowed. 

 

Where do we go from here as a nation?

The 2020 election ended when the last poll closed on November 3rd 2020. Over the coming days final vote tallies will be finalized, some states will have recounts and we will see the end of the process of our 2020 election. There is little doubt in my mind that there will be any change to the current result of a Biden victory in the presidential election. So the question remains, where do we go from here? 

We have seen 20 of the most divisive years in modern American history. Our nation has deep wounds that need to be healed. Divisions that have deepened as tribalism and partisanship has encircled this nation. We must find a way to learn from what has happened and move forward together. So much needs to be accomplished, and the way we have spent most of the last two decades cannot be how we spend the next decade. 

For my whole adult life I have been a registered Republican. Me not supporting Trump has not been a surprise to any. I think there's this misconception among Trump supporters that the reason people opposed him was because their person lost. I didn't vote for Clinton or Trump in 2016. I had no misconceptions that who I voted for would not be in office in 2017. I opposed Trump's leadership in office for nearly 4 years because much of what he pushed for I do not agree with and because of the way he has led for the last 4 years. I opposed him in the same way I opposed Obama for the 8 years prior to that. I praised both for the good things, and opposed the things I didn't agree with. Yes, I have personal feelings that absolutely make me biased against Trump. I'm human, we all have biases. I also listened and tried to understand what those who followed him were upset about and what they were seeking for. Many have felt attacked for much of the last 12 years, including their faith, their views of America, and their political ideology.

There's also a misconception among democrats that Trump supporters are by and far ignorant racists. That they hate people of color and a bigots, etc. From what I've seen that simply isn't true. Those who support him often are people who have shown great kindness in their daily lives to everyone. They supported Trump for many reasons and it would be good for us to listen and understand those reasons if we are ever to move forward as a nation.

There are good people in both parties. What we really need to stop doing is labeling other people and start listening more. I am committing that I will try to do that more to listen and reflect more, and I hope over the coming years we all will. If we ever want to reunite as a country we need to spend more time listening to others, especially those we disagree with. We don't have to agree on everything, but we should strive to find a middle ground where we can move forward together. I hope this change will happen in Washington and in our own homes. May God Bless America.

Tribalism in US politics needs to end now.

Our country is divided, and there is no denying that. Divided on religion, politics, culture and more. This othering has created more problems than it solves in our nation.

Often straw man arguments are the worst of this.  For example, I've always found it strange when people point to certain regions of the country to argue why one party is somehow better than the other. California(blue state) has issues, it has good and bad things happening there. Mississippi(red state) has good and bad things happening there. No party controls an entire state from top to bottom. No county in the entire US voted completely for one individual.

Similarly calling something left or right doesn't somehow shutdown the discussion. There are policies that Bernie Sanders has (campaign finance) that I agree with. There are policies of his I don't agree with. The same is true of Biden, Trump, Warren, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and any other politician.

I have yet to have found a politician that I agree 100% on every issue with or any that I disagree 100% with. Even Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders agree on some issues, and have voted with each other at times. We have more in common as a country than we do that differentiates us. Sadly we have become too focused on the things that divide instead of those that unite. 

We've become too focused on us versus them. Red state versus blue state, Democrats versus Republicans. I've lived in blue states, red states and purple states. There are differences in each, and there are specific policies I prefer in some than in others. Some of those policies came from Republicans, some can from Democrats.

This us versus them mentality is called tribalism. I also nickname it team sports politics. Go ask a Patriots fan if Tom Brady cheated. They will most likely deny he cheated. Ask most other NFL fans, and they will say he absolutely did. This mindset creates blind spots in our thought processes where we refuse to consider ideas outside of our own belief system. You could take the exact same quote and say it was Bernie Sanders or Ted Cruz and tell it to someone and their reaction would be very different depending on who said it. Not what was said, but who said it. The words meaning didn't change, just the person they came from.

Tribalism needs to be put to rest. Individual policies should be evaluated for their merits, not from whom they came from. Candidates should be evaluated for their policies, their experience and their character, not which letter is next to their name. Each of us needs to try to understand what people are pushing for and why. Evaluate the data on both sides and then make a decision for yourself. Taking the party line without evaluating the basics leads to more tribalism.

Some issues I think everyone should spend time thinking and evaluating that are vitally important to our country right now:

Immigration
Tax reform (higher/lower taxes, loopholes, etc.)
Healthcare (Medicare for all, Obamacare, full privatization, removing regulations etc.)
Spending and the national debt
Infrastructure
The responsibilities of government

These are issues that our federal government has direct control over. Being an election year it is vital that we look at these issues and evaluate our stances on them.

Look at as many sides as you can, look at the data those sides and make your own decision. Then discuss with those around you what you've learned. Discuss ideas, open and freely without personal attacks.

In Washington's farewell address he warned of his own fears of parties and tribalism:

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty."

If we are ever to unite as a nation, it will come by being open to trusting those around us, being open to new ideas that are not our own, and by not sinking to the basest notions of human nature.

Trump is not the best president ever. He's also not the worst.

Image Source Flickr CC license 

Something that bothers me with Trump supporters is the occasional claim that Trump is the best president we've ever had.

Many will argue over what achievements he's had and that is fine. It's common and understandable that supporters will give him more credit than those who oppose him.

Even if you think he's a great president, arguing that he's the best president ever is simply willful ignorance.

Lincoln, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, FDR and TR are often thought to be the best presidents in the history of our nation. In my opinion putting Trump above them isn't just laughable, it's willful ignorance.

What has Trump's biggest challenge been? A few matters in foreign affairs? Several large hurricanes (with a mixed record on recovery)? Nearly everything he's faced has been worse in the last 50 years at times, with equal or better records by the president's facing those challenges. The biggest point people push is that the economy is really good. But going from a good economy to a great, doesn't exactly make him the best president ever by far. 

Compare that with the five presidents mentioned, each of whom had lasting significant positive impacts on the history of the country.FDR for instance faced a much more difficult economy, a world war, and passed major legislation that still has impacts to this day. Lincoln faced a country at war, worked to unite the country with the transcontinental railroad and made sure economically those states who remained had a firepower economy. Washington built the government from the ground up, paid off the national debt, established initial ties with foreign countries, and helped keep the country united through the intial years of our country. 

Likewise, the belief that Trump (or Obama) is the worst president in history is also laughable. Buchanan is easily the worst, with his failure to compromise and push forward needed policies to shape the country in a way that it could move forward directly leading to the Civil War. Others that are worth noting, Harding who did very little and whose administration was riddled with fraud and scandals, Andrew Johnson who barely survived impeachment and who opposed reconstruction efforts, and of course Richard Nixon, who resigned in disgrace. Each of these men had major scandals, and divided the country in some of the worst ways. Now, Trump does have time that he could equal any of these men on either side possibly, but it isn't likely that he will. 

What did we learn from the Ford-Kavanaugh hearing?

Thirty years. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy spent thirty years on the Supreme Court. In his final year on the court, the Supreme Court ruled on seventy five cases. Each of those cases will likely impact decades if not centuries of law in the United States.

As we consider seating Justice Kennedy's replacement, this past weekend has made many question how the Ford-Kavanaugh hearing impacts who the next Justice of the Supreme court will be. For most, there is little to debate about Dr. Ford's testimony. You likely either believe her or you do not. So that leaves Judge Kavanaugh's testimony. He began with an abrasive serious of barrages on the democrats on the committee and then continued during the questioning period to misdirect of refused answer many of the questions.

I have thought over the last few days about what I took from his testimony. I have heard a great number of people say how this was an "emotional response," that if I was falsely accused I might act the same way.

First off, I believe it's important to remember that we must hold Supreme Court nominees and justices to the highest standards. Not only because they are a lifetime appointment, but because their rulings can last centuries. We don't want justices making emotional decisions. We want justices with a superhuman knack for being focused on justice and the law. They need to be able to (as much as possible) set aside their own biases, their own experiences and focus on what is equitable, just and what is the law.

We don't want justices playing political games(as Kavanaugh did during that hearing). The supreme court must strive to be as anti-political as possible.

My last point is that this wasn't a spur of the moment emotional reaction as some seem to believe. This was a planned response to the power of Dr. Ford's testimony. This was the man who used to prep supreme court justices for the Bush administration. He made a calculated decision in his opening statement and his responses to questions. His statements had an intended response, to take the conversation away from how credible Dr. Ford sounded and whether or not her allegations might be true, to is this a political stunt by democrats. His point was to rally the troops of the GOP. It wasn't to say I'm innocent, it was to play into Graham/McConnell/Grassley's hands. He did not want the focus of his testimony to be picking apart the facts of the case, which is why he refused to answer so many of the questions.

If he wanted to say "I'm innocent" and I'm an open book willing to prove my innocence, you answer every question as clearly as you can. You are willing to submit to the FBI investigation without a second thought. That was not his desire.

That was not his response. His response was to try to allow the committee to do whatever they could to push his nomination through, by circling the GOP wagons around himself by attacking the "enemy."

Donald Trump Can't Make America Great Again

By The White House - whitehouse.gov, Public Domain

The election is over. Donald Trump has been sworn in as the President of the United States of America. Whatever you may think of him, if you are a U.S. citizen he is your president.

There is a hard road ahead of him. Our country faces many problems which will need his action. He will face economic, diplomatic, and military crises through the next four years. He will face opposition from democrats, republicans and the American people. No matter what he does he cannot, however make America great again.

He can help to make the American economy better. He can work to solve problems the American people face on domestic and foreign issues, but he cannot make America great. If we accept the claim that America once was great but it is no longer great, the cause is not economic problems, diplomatic, or dangers that we face from inside or without. We have always faced those problems in one form or another. Economies change, politics change, but if America is not great now and was before the only thing that I can say is that it is that we lack unity.

Why are we not united? Our politics and the media have hit the wedge between the limbs of our tree, but the true wedge that is splitting us in two is a lack of engagement. Our nation has split in two because we are no longer embracing social and civic interaction. We have begun to not trust each other. It is easier to stay at home and watch Netflix than it is to go and attend your city council meetings. Fewer Americans are becoming involved in our society, and so as a whole our society is struggling. When you only hear your own opinions, you are less likely to have them challenged. If what you watch, read and listen to confirms that, you are less likely to change wrong assumptions.

The longer this cycle goes, the more we begin to begin othering. Those "other" people are to blame. Those "left" or "right" wingers, our president, Congress, immigrants, other races, etc, are to blame. We stop seeking solutions that we ourselves can implement and withdraw into our echo chambers.

On the other hand when we are engaged we build stronger communities that can act, creating lasting change that can and will have a positive impact on the communities in which we live. In a book by Dr. Robert Putnam called "Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community," Dr. Putnam sites multiple studies that show that those who are engaged are more likely to be healthier, wealthier, and happier. They are less likely to commit crimes, and have stronger marriages. So not only will you make your communities and country better, but you will become a better person.

Trump cannot solve these problems. He cannot issue an order to make us all attend PTA, City Council or other civic meetings. He cannot make us become involved. So if you want to make America great again, get out of your comfort zone, perform an act of service, join a club, get involved in your cities, your neighborhoods, etc. Listen to someone with a different opinion and try to see things from their viewpoint. Seek to truly build unity by creating bonds across races, religions, genders, and political beliefs. If you truly want to make America great, it starts with you, not Donald Trump.

Fact Check "Congressional Reform Act of 2012"

If you see this just know that whoever wrote this is baing their information on myth, not on fact. It shows a profound lack of research or even a basic understanding of how Congress functions.

1. Congress participates in FERS(Federal Employee Retirement System). This is the same retirement system postal workers, janitors, researchers etc. participate in. They also have no tenure of any kind, as we know members of Congress have terms of either 2 or 6 years. As a side note, their pension was changed, and now on average pays 30,000 less per year than it used to.
2. This is how it currently is, unless they are eligible for federal retirement(minimum of 5 years, and small% of original pay, must be passed a certain age and meet eligibility requirements) or have reached the age where they receive social security.
3. Members of Congress already pay into social security. (since 1984)
4. Considering it's in the FERS, it's a little different, but pretty much similar, but they're already paying into the FERS.
5. Many already do, the real adjustment should be to eliminate their ability to do insider trading (they know X bill is coming to a vote to affect Y industry, they can vote and make money on it) Some members of Congress tried to pass something in 2012, but it was blocked.
6. Currently they haven't voted themselves a pay raise in quite awhile.
7. Most of them participate in the same healthcare plans that any federal employees receive. Some have purchased private insurance plans.
8. This claim is false.The only exception to this is in the constitution, where they cannot be arrested while heading to the capitol. (so that party bosses couldn't sway a vote by locking up the enemy, yes this has happened)
9. Whoever wrote this one has no clue what they are talking about. What contracts do they think members of Congress have?

America's Infrastructure Is Crumbling

Image Source:Flickr

This week Congress once again failed to pass a continuing resolution to fund the government. One of the issues they continue to push down the road is the issue of infrastructure funding.

Most of our funding for infrastructure comes from sales tax on gasoline. As vehicles become more efficient, less gas is needed and funding for our infrastructure diminishes.

The American Society of Civil Engineers’(ASCE) most recent report card on the U.S. infrastructure scored a D+. And according to the World Economic Forum, the U.S. now ranks 16th overall in quality of infrastructure, behind other major countries like France, Spain and Japan. According to the ASCE report, an estimated $1.7 trillion in additional spending is needed by 2020 for our surface transportation to be adequately improved.

A recent report showed that there are at least 61,000 bridges which are structurally deficient and in need of serious repair or replacement. These bridges see tens of millions of drivers daily and there is no telling when the next one will fail.


Our roads, for example, require a lot of maintenance, especially after long winters. Potholes and rough roads cost drivers an estimated $324 a year on car repairs. Many cold-weather states and cities sink much of their transportation budgets into repairing these roads yearly.

Right now 42% of America’s city highways are considered highly congested. And that costs our nation's economy an estimated $101 billion in wasted time and fuel each year. Maintaining our infrastructure is also very costly.

Everyone in Congress will tell you that they are very concerned about the nation's crumbling infrastructure, but no one can agree on an approach to repairing it. Short resolutions have pased

The biggest issue is how to fund it. The most commonly suggested plan would be to raise the gas tax a few cents in order to bolster federal Highway Trust Fund revenue. House Republican leaders want to change corporate tax laws that encourage U.S. companies to park foreign profits overseas and use this revenue to fully pay for highway and transit aid. The change would allow corporations to transfer money back to the U.S. at a lower tax rate.

Senator Bernie Sanders, former presidential hopeful, introduced a bill last year which would have increased infrastructure spending by $1 trillion over five years. "My legislation puts 13 million people to work repairing the backlog of infrastructure projects all across this country,” Sanders said. “These projects require equipment, supplies and services, and the hard-earned salaries from these jobs will be spent in countless restaurants, shops and other local businesses. It’s no surprise that groups across the political spectrum – from organized labor to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – agree that investing in infrastructure will pay dividends for future generations.”

One suggestion by former republican presidential hopeful Ohio Governor John Kasich, was that the federal government decrease their gas tax, thereby allowing individual states with greater infrastructure needs to increase their own gas taxes accordingly, thereby cutting out the middle man and making sure the funding goes to the states with the greatest need.

"Instead of sending our gas tax money to Washington, where federal bureaucrats skim some off the top to pay for their own agencies, Congress should dramatically cut the 18.4 cents-per-gallon federal gas tax to just a few cents per gallon — just enough to pay for interstate connectivity and other safety concerns. States would then be free to set their own gas tax rates, aligned to their own needs as identified by their own residents, communities, and leaders."

For years, transportation experts have called for a massive investment to save a network of roads, bridges and transit systems that has fallen into disrepair. Will Congress work to solve this problem now or punt the question down the road again?