View Single Post
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 05-03-2008, 05:16 PM
JEQuidam's Avatar
JEQuidam JEQuidam is offline
Observer
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6
usa
JEQuidam is on a distinguished road
Credits: 110
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaBlack View Post
If all of our districts were limited to 50,000 that would mean thousands of reps.

In principle I think it would be more represenative to have all those reps...
But on the other hand think of the redistricting expenses, the payroll, and the logistics. It doesn't seem feasible.
I argue that increasing our number of Representatives would ultimately reduce the net cost of government; see link below:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaBlack View Post
And seeing how redistricting works in this country, I'd expect to see even more corruption in the end.
If you're referring to Gerrymandering, it would be virtually eliminated by 50,000-person districts. There's not too much gerrymandering that can be done when the congressional districts are that small.
__________________
It was supposed to be our House.
Thirty-Thousand.org
Reply With Quote