Congress passed a law to where every county ( or parish) in the nation has a congressional representative… that would truly solve the issue.. couldn't be more representative of the people's will.. I know I know, Democrats will say that's not fair because most rural counties have smaller populations who lean more conservative… sorry… and here is the caveat … the county pays for there congressional reps pay and it's based on whatever that county sets that pay at.. I'm just bored…. Rip me to shreds!

Would be illegal due to the 1 person 1 vote principle.

So what do you do in Virginia where you have a mix of cities and counties?


Why should the 50 residents of loving county get the same number of reps as the 5 million people in harris county?i

Wasn't the constitution originally aligned to one congressional rep per 30,000 people?

Sounds like the Imperial Senate.

torrid said:

---

Sounds like the Imperial Senate.

---

So that's how democracy dies. With ill-conceived TexAgs posts.

oh no said:

---

Breaking news: Harris, Bexar, Travis, and Dallas counties vote to split into 127 new counties.

---

I am shocked this only got 16 stars in 30 minutes

Decay said:

---

torrid said:

---

Sounds like the Imperial Senate.

---

So that's how democracy dies. With ill-conceived TexAgs posts.

---

Democracy has never, In the history of the world, been tried and worked.

This really would not work. But I do think we need to increase the size of congress substantially. Currently the average congressional district has more than 750,000 people.

The best way to do this is just to have AI do the calcs.

Now that disparate impact is dead, there is no reason not to crank out districts minimizing the farthest two points of the districts given pop density.

So, for each district you measure the length between the farthest two boundaries of the district. Lets call that CDGD congressional district greatest diameter.

Divide the state into the number of reps to get reps per district.
Minimize aggregate CDGD with roughly equal pop.

No sweat.

I think it is either go with something like that, or just accept Gerrymandering as part of the political process. I think that Gerrymandering is the most likely way forward.

schmellba99 said:

---

BigN--00 said:

---

This really would not work. But I do think we need to increase the size of congress substantially. Currently the average congressional district has more than 750,000 people.

---

The first thing we need to do is realize the Founders were smarter than the people that came in an changed the structure of the system - which means we abolish the 17th Amendment and the selection of senators goes back to the state legislature and not a direct vote of the people.

We also need to go back to the system where actual taxpayers get to vote and those that pay no taxes and leech off of the system do not get to vote.

---

There are zero people in the United States that pay "no taxes"

There are zero people in the United States that pay "no Federal Taxes"

There are many people that do not pay federal income taxes.

I am good with limiting people that pay no federal taxes not getting to vote, but that is effectively zero people.

AgDev01 said:

---

So what do you do in Virginia where you have a mix of cities and counties?


Why should the 50 residents of loving county get the same number of reps as the 5 million people in harris county?i

---

Considering the voting habits of those 2 counties, that would be great

schmellba99 said:

---

those that pay no taxes and leech off of the system do not get to vote.

---

But if government-dependent recipients don't get to vote while government funding payers do, we won't be able to vote ourselves into Venezuela 2.0, democrats won't have incentive to keep people poor, make more people poor, or import the third world poors and call it "asylum" so we can vote ourselves into socialism.

Decay said:

---

torrid said:

---

Sounds like the Imperial Senate.

---

So that's how democracy dies. With ill-conceived TexAgs posts.

---

We are not a democracy.

Not a Creed thread.

It was just a star wars joke

1. The Supreme Court would immediately strike it down as unconstitutional due to the precedent set by Reynolds v. Sims.
2. There are more than 3000 counties in the US. Would we be able to handle that many House members?
3. States are allowed to redraw county lines whenever they want, so this would still be vulnerable to gerrymandering.

K2-HMFIC said:

---

Wasn't the constitution originally aligned to one congressional rep per 30,000 people?

---

It was. With today's population, the House would have over 11,000 members.

https://thirty-thousand.org/ has a bunch of information about this.

oh no said:

---

Breaking news: Harris, Bexar, Travis, and Dallas counties vote to split into 127 new counties.

---

That would be FINE. The former Dallas county would become something like 45-48% Republican. I'm guessing Harris would be similar or slightly less while the other two would be closer to 40%.

Incidentally, Congress couldn't do this; it would require a constitutional amendment.

AgDev01 said:

---

So what do you do in Virginia where you have a mix of cities and counties?


Why should the 50 residents of loving county get the same number of reps as the 5 million people in harris county?i

---

I would trust the 50 in Loving more than I would the 5,000,000 in Harris

Decay said:

---

It was just a star wars joke

---

Doh!

too much variation in counties.

apportionment by population is great, but there is no reason an algorithm with a few simple rules couldn't create compact, contiguous districts bounded by major geographical boundaries. Make it open source so it can be scrutinized.

The big change I would make is to up the number of reps by 10X and set things up such that they work from their districts almost entirely. Some meetings might have to take place in their state capital and precious few in DC and maybe with delegates from a state's slate of reps. But their butts need to spend more time at home and the numbers need to be greater so constituents have easier access and their individual power is diluted. (read that last bit is harder to buy off)

BonfireNerd04 said:

---

K2-HMFIC said:

---

Wasn't the constitution originally aligned to one congressional rep per 30,000 people?

---

It was. With today's population, the House would have over 11,000 members.

https://thirty-thousand.org/ has a bunch of information about this.

---

And the minimum could be 50 (1 per state). The 1 per 30,000 number does not define the minimum number of Reps.

Our current Congress cannot even agree to pay all Federal employees for the work they do.

No way they pass a Constitutional Amendment needed for this plan.

Sq 17 said:

---

Burdizzo said:

---

oh no said:

---

Breaking news: Harris, Bexar, Travis, and Dallas counties vote to split into 127 new counties.

---

I am shocked this only got 16 stars in 30 minutes

---

People were giving it the blue star because it was clever satire not because they endorsed the idea
HTH

---

When you have to explain satire, it's a lot less funny.

I reread and can't figure out if you were also being satirical and deleted my post
No offense Burd I think I misread the first time through
As the phrase goes
"You were too clever by 1/2"

> What if...

Nevermind I thought this thread was about something else