THIS part of the U.S. government is too SMALL!!!Submitted by pawnstorm12 on Tue, 11/17/2009 - 02:26
The following idea was suggested by economist Walter Williams of George Mason University (Ron Paul mentioned him as a possible vice presidential running mate if he had won the primary) and that is quite the endorsement!.
Williams points out that when our founders established the House of Representatives the idea of it was to GROW WITH THE POPULATION which is the BIGGEST REASON they established a CENSUS.
George Washington wanted 1 representative for about every 35,000 people (it's in the Constitution).
AND...as the country grew, so indeed did the House of Representatives to REFLECT that.
UNTIL EARLY LAST CENTURY...
In 1911, Congress passed Public Law 62-5, which limited the size of the House of Representatives to 435 MEMBERS. That law took effect in 1913 and that number still stands today (NOTE THAT THIS WAS THE SAME YEAR THAT THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX WERE CREATED--A VERY TOUGH YEAR FOR THE REPUBLIC).
This means that today, there is an average of 700,000 PEOPLE PER EACH MEMBER OF THE HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES.
NO WONDER THEY ARE OUT OF TOUCH WITH US.
By George Washington's standards for congress, today there would be around 7000 members of the US House of Representatives!!!
NOW THAT would be representing the people!
...THE VERY SEGMENT of government that SHOULD have grown was HALTED at 435 while EVERY OTHER aspect of government (WHICH DOESN'T REPRESENT THE PEOPLE) has grown to COMMUNISTIC LEVELS.
But this was by design so that the House could be much easier to control, persuade and corrupt (after all they only need 218 votes to pass a bill in the House).
IT IS ALWAYS easier to persuade a smaller number of people to do wrong than to convince a LARGER number to do the same.
AND THAT is why growth in the House of Representatives was limited to that small a number BUT it is a great DIS-SERVICE to the people AND to the Constitution. Practically CRIMINAL in intent.
AND WHAT REALLY AMAZES ME is that they didn't even need an amendment to the Constitution to CHANGE THE INTENT of the founders on this subject.
AGAIN...THE VERY SEGMANT OF GOVERNMENT WHICH SHOULD HAVE GROWN WITH THE COUNTRY WAS INTENTIONALLY STIFLED SO THE WE THE PEOPLE COULD MORE EASILY BE UN-REPRESENTED.
The year 1913 was DISASTEROUS for the UNITED STATES AND WOODROW WILSON SHOULD HAVE BEEN TRIED AS A TRAITOR (You might as well throw William Howard Taft in there too because the Federal Income tax was actually HIS idea but it was instuted in 1913 under Wilson).
This posting was presented by "pawnstorm12" who sometimes wonders if he would be happier living in ignorance as he did before the Ron Paul phenomenon.