We now have 50 senators and 435 house representatives plus their aids, clerical help, offices, and the expense accounts for all personnel and offices, office equipment, etc. This could add up to over 2 million dollars per legislator per year. This does not take into account the future expenses for benefits such as retirements, health insurance, etc.

Do you suppose we would function better at half the price if we cut the number of legislators in half? Am I the only tax paying citizen to ask this question? What are your thoughts?

The problem is, that as you cut down the number of House members, you make those left much more powerful.

The number of House members is not about money, it is about representation.

If you want to save money, cut their salaries and benefits, as Ben Franklin said, government jobs should be reluctantly taken and gladly given up. If a government job becomes a source of wealth, the people will suffer no end of misery. Those that seek public office for personal gain will push aside those that are civic minded and it is the civic minded you want to attract.

The idea behind the house was to have one representative for every 30,000 people. That's what gave the citizen his voice and stopped any particular representative from getting too powerful.

But they recognized that as the country grew, it would be impractical to allow the House to get too big, as it would be too unwieldy. So after the minimum number of representatives were met, the Constitution allowed congress to determine where to limit the number.

What you need to understand is that the representative, that represents you, should come from your area, so that you know who he is, by reputation, so that his voice reflects the voice of you and your neighbourhood.

If you limit the number of representatives, then your voice gets drowned out as he represents multiple neighbourhoods.

If you cut the number down severely, then your v****g for someone you know nothing about and he knows nothing about you or your neighbourhood.

As you limit the number of representatives, it becomes much easier to buy them by special interests.
You no longer have anyone else to turn to to fight any decisions they make.

It is about representation.

Representation is just one of the costs of a free self governing people.

Freedom ain't free, it never was and will never be free.

The "PROBLEM" REALLY IS, the fact that NOT ENOUGH v**ers are getting involved in the E******n Process. MOST know NOTHING about the Nominees BEFORE the PRIMARY E******ns, so they just start marking ones off that they "might have heard the name before", and it might have been on the Americas Most Wanted, they don't know, or care. Then we wind up with Electees that don't know their butts from a HOLE in the ground, about what their Constituents want, then at the reg. E******ns, you pick your Party Member, who you decide is the LESSER OF TWO EVILS!! THAT is how we wind up with Politicians that are only IN IT FOR THE MONEY!!!

GET INVOLVED!!! KNOW WHO YOU ARE V****G FOR and WHAT HE STANDS FOR!! Wouldn't hurt to also, check on his past record and what he has DONE FOR the Community!!!

I actually think the opposite. I think too many know-nothing-v**ers are getting involved.

There was a time when they recognized their ignorance and voluntarily stayed home.

The politicians don't want them to stay home, because they want them to listen to the main stream media and v**e they way the press tells them too.

That doesn't work with informed and educated v**ers, but, the heavy influx of know-nothing-v**ers washes out their v**e and keeps the political elite elected.

You have to realize that there are a LOT of Republicans that STAY HOME too, although Trump got a record number of them to the polls this time!!! And there are a lot of Republicans that don't know WHO they are v****g for too. Just like in our Primaries coming up on the 15th, for midterms. Mo Brooks has been against Trump from the start. He is against the Wall, He is against Immigration reform, he is against a LOT of things that I am FOR.

One of the SO-CALLED Conservative Groups that, all I have seen them ACCOMPLISH is DONATIONS from people expecting them to ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING that they SAY they are promoting!!! They are promoting Mo Brooks and I have asked them to STOP sending me any promotions on him!!!

It was true in 2012 that a lot of republicans stayed home, but, a bigger block was the libertarians that stayed home. That did not happen in 2016.

In 2012, the Democrats and the press worked to demoralize the Republican party and convince them that Obama's success was a done deal and v****g against him was a waste of time. To a large extent, that worked. The people got suckered and stayed home, giving Obama the presidency.

But, there was even a larger group that stayed home. The Libertarians got their noses bent out of shape when the Republicans disrespected Ron Paul at the RNC.

To teach the Republicans a lesson, they stayed home in large numbers, effectively handing over the presidency to Obama.

And see what they got!! I hope they learned a lesson. I did not v**e for Ron Paul!! I would NEVER have v**ed for him in the Primaries!! I liked him OK, He did a lot of good, but he had a BUNCH of ideas that I did NOT like!!! But, that being said, I would have v**ed for him against Obama!!!
There are a LOT of people out there that have NEVER V**ED IN THEIR LIVES. I know one of them myself. She is ignorant, about ANYTHING you care to mention, and she has NEVER even Registered to v**e because she MIGHT get called one day for Jury Duty. I was in my 60s before I EVER got called for JD. She says she doesn't want to be responsible for anyone going to Prison. Sounds like a Lib to me, which she is!!! And she is probably right. She should NEVER be responsible for deciding the fate of ANYONE, on trial for ANYTHING!!!
Like the Republicans cared whether or not Obama won or not.

There was also massive fraud that took place in 2012 by the Democrats, but, had every person that v**ed against Obama in 2008, showed up in 2012, that would have been enough to defeat Obama despite the fraud.

I guess that's the fate of quitters.

With that loss in mind, there was a deliberate effort, not to repeat the mistakes of 2012. Tremendous effort went into reminding people of what happens when they stay home, because they embrace defeat.

So when you say "a LOT of Republicans STAY HOME," that applied to 2012, it did not apply to 2016.

It was because, few Republicans stayed home in 2016, that the fraud committed by the Democrats, led to nothing and T***p w*n the e******n!

The "PROBLEM" REALLY IS, the fact that NOT ENOUGH v**ers are getting involved in the E******n Process. MOST know NOTHING about the Nominees BEFORE the PRIMARY E******ns, so they just start marking ones off that they "might have heard the name before", and it might have been on the Americas Most Wanted, they don't know, or care. Then we wind up with Electees that don't know their butts from a HOLE in the ground, about what their Constituents want, then at the reg. E******ns, you pick your Party Member, who you decide is the LESSER OF TWO EVILS!! THAT is how we wind up with Politicians that are only IN IT FOR THE MONEY!!!

GET INVOLVED!!! KNOW WHO YOU ARE V****G FOR and WHAT HE STANDS FOR!! Wouldn't hurt to also, check on his past record and what he has DONE FOR the Community!!!

We now have 50 senators and 435 house representatives plus their aids, clerical help, offices, and the expense accounts for all personnel and offices, office equipment, etc. This could add up to over 2 million dollars per legislator per year. This does not take into account the future expenses for benefits such as retirements, health insurance, etc.

Do you suppose we would function better at half the price if we cut the number of legislators in half? Am I the only tax paying citizen to ask this question? What are your thoughts?

WEELLL. SOMEBODY has to tell we'uns what to think, how to talk, and to walk!!! NOT!!!

I answered this quote but opp must have deleted it. A LOT of that going around these days.

And you see what they got!! I would never have v**ed for Ron Paul in the Primaries!! I liked him ok, but there were a lot of things he said in the Debates that caused me NOT to want him as POTUS!!! I think he had some good points though, and I think he did some good as a Senator, but he still was not POTUS material. IMO!! BUT if he had been the People's choice for the ACTUAL E******n, I would have v**ed for him against Obama!!!