You have excellent ideas there, No.7!
Madison threw out the Amendment Mason wrote suggesting representation. Having proper representation would also increase the number needed for the electoral college as the 2 are tied together. The EO was stymied by Congress' arbitrary 435 number.
Original 1st Amendment:
"After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons."
Had the amendment been ratified, the number of members of the House of Representatives could by now be over 6,000 compared to the present 435. If they met via internet, that fair representation wouldn't be a problem. It would also discourage those fiends from ganging up into groups of 8 or whatever number they gang up as. We also need to do away with political parties. What about a limit as to what a candidate can spend on their election? Or then no one candidate can spend more than the other candidates unning for a seat? How can we stop politicians from being leashed by the corporatists and banksters?
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opi