There are times when even the most dedicated amongst us have to sit down, take stock, and regroup. I am physically ill from the treason that just occurred today in the halls of Congress. No republic dies of a single blow, but dies many deaths before it is finally exhausted. Today obliterated what was left of our Republic as the Senate voted 60-38 to approve the TPP. With barely a blimp in the headlines crowded by relentless lunacy about the Confederate Flag and gay rights the Senate just approved a trade bill that will now go to the President to be signed into law. In the dark of the night when no one was paying attention, this legislation was jammed through via political strong arming and corrupt buy-offs of Congress even though up to 90% of polled Americans opposed the legislation. The passage of this bill will prove to be one of the major acts of America’s demise and mark a point where our nation descended into true tyranny. Read more
Archive for Congress
Global Updates: May 29, 2015
-Seismic activity has markedly increased globally over the last few months and 2015 may prove to be an above average year. Major quakes have struck the Pacific Ring to include the disastrous quake in Nepal. Just yesterday evening a large quake struck northern Alaska. Further and I believe most likely related, volcanic activity is spiking globally. Just this week a volcano in Southern Japan literally exploded while volcanoes from Chile to Hawaii are again spewing lava and ash. These events tend to go in cycles as fault lines unzip and pressure is released. One can reasonable expect more events in the coming months and should be on high alert if they live near/on a fault line, near an active volcano, or along a coast vulnerable to tsunamis. Further, sustained volcanic activity will affect weather patterns and could lead to cooler than normal temperatures for months after the eruption. Currently, this is not an issue, but if other major eruptions occur this year and are sustained, this will certainly alter the Earth’s weather because the ash gets swept up into the high atmosphere where it spreads globally and reflects sunlight.
http://www.volcanodiscovery.com/erupting_volcanoes.html
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/
http://www.livescience.com/46576-more-earthquakes-still-random-process.html
-ISIL still holds Ramadi contrary to US Secretary of State John Kerry’s stupid predictions last week. ISIL has now likely outmaneuvered the Iraqi counter attack claiming to have encircled “on 3 sides” the terrorist army. I am not sure how that translates to “encircled,” but whether or not there was a problem with the Arabic translation, in plain English that means ISIL has a flank wide open to reinforce or retreat through and they likely exploited this gap. The fact that we haven’t seen an outright retreat of ISIL from Ramadi, which the Iraqi government would quickly publicize, tells you everything you need to know about the facts on the ground. Further, as the Iraqi Army bears down on Ramadi, ISIL will no doubt maneuver its main element to attack where the Iraqi Army is not in strength. I would rate it highly likely that Fallujah, Hit, and areas of Baghdad will be attacked whether or not ISIL conducts a tactical withdrawal from Ramadi. This tactic has already demonstrated it is effective against the slow and unwieldy government forces. It wears them down, attrits their forces, and demoralizes the government. The war will only intensify and if ISIL is not dislodged from Ramadi within the next week, it will likely solidify and hold its gains making any future attempts to dislodge them extremely costly for the Iraqi military.
http://www.thenational.ae/world/middle-east/15-killed-in-baghdad-hotel-bombings
-The US admits Obama’s ISL “strategy” is not working. Reports also are trickling out of major dissent within the Pentagon. Further, as predicted, airstrikes have proved of limited value and now the military is saying it needs to commit more troops. I warned of this predictable escalation back to a full scale war in the Middle East. Humility truly is a virtue so I take no please in saying once again, “I told you so.” In fact, last year, I was so disgusted with even the mere use of the term “strategy,” that I wrote an entire piece blasting the Administration and its completely idiotic, non-strategy, that was predestined to failure. If you truly want to understand why we are failing and Iraq and why it will only get worse as I verbatim described in my analysis, you need to read and share: http://www.blackboxwire.com/2014/10/11/islamic-extremism-and-what-lies-ahead-part-ii-the-war-on-isis-and-syria/. You can then read the short follow-up to the above article at:
The five minutes you spend reading these two articles will serve as one of the best primers to understanding the escalating crisis in Iraq and the greater Middle East and why we are getting it wrong. Rather than just calling out incompetents/incompetence in the government, I am going to simply name key individuals that have legitimate influence and ask them to take notes. Perhaps 99% will never see the article or read it, but if even 1% takes the time to skim the article, progress is being made. Today, I want to challenge @Phil_Gaskin, who most likely finds my anti-leftist statements blasphemy, but I want to give him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he is the sole voice of reason in the Administration…I don’t know. What I do know is he is smart enough to read my articles and understand that by adopting what I am recommending would save everyone a lot of heartache and inject some professionalism into what, to date, has been a never ending policy amateur hour of disaster after disaster. So to you Phil Gaskin, I challenge you to have a sit down discussion about what a real ISIL strategy should be.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/29/team-obama-shrugs-at-isis-victories.html
-The draconian anti-“Patriot Act” is due to sunset this weekend. Americans that still value their civil liberties would celebrate this law expiring, but have little optimism anything will change. In fact, it is likely that President Obama will illegally continue the unconstitutional domestic spy programs with or without faux legal authority. Not only is this extremely hypocritical of a president that ran on returning our civil liberties and ending the spy state, but it will prove just how lawless our nation has become. Even after the courts and anyone with basic sense determined that what the Patriot Act was being used to justify was utterly unconstitutional; (Specifically, total collection of electronic records without probable cause or a search warrant.) power hungry and/or bought politicians still are trying to make a case for why this law is needed. I would immediately point out to anyone to be on guard for the “all or nothing” spin. The Administration is trying to scare people into believing if the illegal data collection is stopped, we will suddenly become vulnerable. This is absurd. First of all, NSA’s domestic collection has to date stopped zero terrorists. Second, if the Administration was actually worried about US security, they would immediately stop importing Muslims to the US from around the world and particularly, from places like Somalia where everyone and their brother seems to be connected to Al Shabaab. Finally, NSA will continue to operate in its legitimate mission to protect Americans by returning to foreign collection. It isn’t as if NSA will cease to function and not have a job if they are no longer targeting Americans. In fact, they may actually become more effective, efficient, and actually gain some victories over foreign enemies of the state.
Global Updates: May 21, 2015
ISIL holds Ramadi: The White House, Defense Department, and Secretary of State have all down played the fall of Ramadi as a small “target of opportunity” and mild “setback.” However, in reality, the fall of Ramadi was very foreseeable and a massive military disaster for the Iraqi government. As I forecasted, Mosul would not be retaken anytime soon and the Obama strategy…or lack thereof, would be a total disaster. See http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2014/10/01/islamic-extremism-and-what-lies-ahead-part-ii-the-war-on-isis-and-syria/#more-699 Rather than being beat back, it is now highly likely that ISIL will continue to press its attack while the Iraqi Army is trying to regroup and capture large parts if not all of Fallujah. If Fallujah falls, Baghdad will finally be seriously threatened by ISIL.
Sirte falls, ISIL takes 3rd major city in 48 hours: In what is proving to be another example of Obama’s Foreign Policy disaster initiated under Secretary Clinton and amplified under Secretary Kerry, another major city has fallen to ISIL. However, it is not in Syria or Iraq. The city is in Libya. Yes, the country Obama, Rice, Clinton, and Power “liberated” has now had the western city of Sirte overrun by radical Islamists loyal to ISIL. According to my count that makes the score in just the last 48 hours 3 ISIL: 0 USA. Ramadi, Palmyra, and now Sirte all have been overrun. Even if ISIL can’t hold the ground, the fact they took down three major cities in just days is telling of how “successful” the US strategy to combat ISIL has been. In fact, Obama’s “strategy” has been such a disaster, one would conclude that he couldn’t possibly have been that stupid and the only way this could be occurring was if it was his intent all along. It is either amateur hour and Obama desperately needs to read some alternative news and hire new NSC advisors or the man is a traitor.
Russia no longer allowing NATO supplies to move across its borders to Afghanistan: In another foreign policy disaster that has completely escaped the government media complex, Russia has now halted NATO supplies crossing its borders to Afghanistan. I verbatim warned of this on March 23, 2014 saying the Russians could play this card in retaliation for NATO escalation in the Ukraine and make it extremely painful to maintain our troops in Afghanistan. http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/?s=russia+will+cut+supply+lines Now the US has only one supply route for its forces. The unreliable and costly southern supply route begins in the Port of Karachi and runs north through Pakistan and into Afghanistan through extremely dangerous Taliban controlled provinces. Each convoy that is allowed to pass through these areas pays a heavy toll, which in turn is then used to fund Taliban operations. Further, Pakistan now has gained significant political leverage over Washington to extort any amount of money it wishes to allow passage of critical NATO supplies. http://rt.com/news/259809-russia-stops-nato-afghanistan-cargo/
FBI making house calls to people concerned about Jade Helm 15: In what could be viewed as a major escalation bolstering concerns amongst the public over the upcoming Jade Helm 15 exercise, FBI special agents have apparently begun making house calls to concerned citizens that have raised questions publicly. http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/video-fbi-now-going-door-to-door-interrogating-americans-about-jade-helm-military-exercises-we-follow-pp-with-anything-like-that_05212015 Although, the special agents appear very polite and almost embarrassed to be performing the house calls, the fact they are knocking on doors is chilling. Ironically, if the intent was to quell fears and concerns as the agents suggest, they are clearly having the exact opposite effect. I doubt the special agents are so dumb that can’t figure this out, but why they are not speaking out about how ridiculous and counterproductive these visits are is disturbing. Common sense tells you their real intent is to gauge the subject’s political views and whether or not to deem him a threat. As agents, they should be well aware that people are allowed to have distrust of the government, dissent, and openly question authority especially, when it is launching an exercise designed to target American citizens in the US. Whether the intent is to intimidate or not, it is clear field offices have been spun up to believe citizens that simply want the rule of law respected are now the threat. This has been so hyped by DHS and the DOJ, it is coming at the expense of legitimate threats like MS13 and New Black Panther Party members publicly calling for the execution of police and making good on those threats. The Justice Department will certainly spin this to say it is just doing its “due diligence” to make sure things are peaceful and safe, but anyone with half a brain sees the biased political motivations forcing agents out to conduct house calls on people that pose zero threat to anyone following the law and respecting the US Constitution.
China and US escalate tensions: Recent moves by China to exclude airspace to US military aircraft has led to an increase in tensions. However, this really has nothing to do with some small dots of islands, territorial integrity, or military development. The deeper issue arising is that China has risen to a peer competitor level status with the US threatening the post-Bretton Woods financial establishment. Historically, when the bankers were threatened it led directly to war and I doubt this will end differently. Specifically, China has established a counter balance to the IMF that Washington desperately tried to stop and utterly failed to prevent. This single act has broken the IMF/World Bank monopoly and the major banking families intend to make China pay for its actions. Further, China has also been concluding multi-billion dollar oil/gas deals with Russia, which has undermined any ability Washington thought it had to isolate and strong-arm Russia. In short, China is now seen as a real threat, but not to America, but rather, to the elites of the Western financial monopoly. As such, you can bet you will see a strong shift toward painting China as a bigger and bigger existential military threat that very well could lead to the outbreak of war.
Who benefits when the world attacks Yemen? Al Qaeda and the Elite.
Who benefits when the world attacks Yemen? This is a question that policies makers should have asked before allowing the president to start another foreign war. In fact, it was asked and the answer was Al Qaeda. Being that Al Qaeda would be the ultimate winner, one must wonder what kind of treason allowed this war to proceed. In spite of this knowledge, the United States still backed an Arab coalition in a completely unjustified offensive war against Yemen. The purported purpose was to bring back the ousted president, but anyone with half a brain would immediately know this was preposterous. Yemenis are not going to ever accept a president that used a foreign militaries to kill its citizens to regain power. Thus, knowing that the US was aware that by weakening the Houthi rebels they would by default strengthen Al Qaeda and still not achieve their stated goal, one must look deeper to reveal very disturbing consistencies in US Foreign Policy.
To recap, since the ouster of Yemen’s president widely seen as a US puppet, Saudi Arabia has overtly and the US clandestinely bombed Yemen. The Houthis still retain power and the population is even more aligned against the ousted president than before the war against Yemen was unleashed. Further, AQ broke into a prison and released 300 terrorist prisoners. Al Qaeda has also made significant territorial gains and seized military bases containing weapons stockpiles. In the meantime, a humanitarian disaster has ensued with thousands of civilians being killed in the bombing raids and fighting while many Yemenis are starving to death. This operation by any bar has been a total failure and is becoming a humanitarian disaster. However, no one in the media or Congress is calling out President Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient, for starting an unconstitutional war, losing it, and killing thousands of innocent people all while aiding our enemy. Why? Read more
Oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Trade Deal
We have been told by our nation’s leaders that the never ending free trade agreements being drafted and approved in secret are great for America. However, the reality is that these trade deals have all been at the expense of America. The free trade deals have all but obliterated American jobs and industry and are being written by global corporations concerned solely with the bottom line of their most senior executives. Most of us can at least remember Ross Perot’s famous “sucking sound” comment in reference to the disastrous effect the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) would have on our economy. He was laughed at then by Bush 1, but we aren’t laughing now as our battered economy barely maintains a pulse and Perot was proved correct. Today we are being faced with the face tracking of the most egregious deal yet, the TPP, which will utterly destroy the last vestiges of American industrial power and ultimately bring down our economy.
As I warned over a year ago (see article), the TPP will utterly finish off what little remains of American industry and global dominance. For those still willing and able to take the fight to Congress, now is the time to oppose this rotten deal that has been done in complete secrecy at your expense. Even worse, the Republican controlled Congress has sold you out by aiding and abetting President Obama to get this deal passed without public scrutiny. These traitors are accomplishing this by voting to cede Congress’ constitutional authority to approve trade deals to the sole discretion of the President. So much for checks and balances John Boehner. I have said it many times, if you think for a second that a Republican controlled government is any different and will stand up for our Constitution and the rule of law you are badly mistaken. The difference between Democrats and Republicans is generally just semantic now and it would be better to refer to the parties more accurately as the communist party and the socialist party respectively. Aside from a very few hold outs, Congress is completely bought and sold and you will pay the price for it if your apathy prevents you from action. However you can find a way, raise hell with your elected leaders and demand that Congress retain their authority to review trade deals and that the TPP is stopped. Read more
Why No One Should Serve in the US Military: Your leaders are incompetent and your next Secretary of Defense is no exception.
The face of your next wartime leader…really?
As a combat veteran of the wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq, I am going to be very blunt. Lives depend on being direct and the need for military personnel to come forward and tell the truth. In fact, it is chilling that no one has called out the insanity taking place before our very eyes within the ranks of the military. The senior military leadership is incompetent to lead. Our failures in both Iraq and Afghanistan bare this out. Today’s testimony by the soon to be next Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter should make it blatantly clear that no one should consider joining our military. For current active duty and reserve members, run for the door and get the hell out as soon as your obligations allow. Read more
NATO Declares War in Afghanistan Over!…But forgets to inform the Taliban
After over a decade of fighting, the Afghan War ends in strategic defeat for the US and NATO
On December 28, 2014, the US and NATO declared an end to the mission and therefore the war in Afghanistan. A Taliban statement from Zabihullah Mujahidon, a Taliban spokesman, left no doubt to how it was interpreted according to Reuters.
“ISAF rolled up its flag in an atmosphere of failure and disappointment without having achieved anything substantial or tangible.”
Washington may not like the statement and downplay it, but it doesn’t change the reality that the statement is accurate. Not so ironically, the US and NATO have been mute over the success of the war. No celebrations, no parades, no victory speeches…the absence of all of this should signal that our leaders know it was a failure. In fact, not only did the combined force of NATO and the US not achieve a decisive victory over the Taliban, they suffered a strategic defeat. Read more
Islamic extremism and what lies ahead? Part II: The War on ISIL and Syria
Airstrikes in Iraq
President Obama and his top military advisors have learned nothing and have made a grave mistake starting a war with Syria using ISIL as the pretext. Just as I was confident and proven correct that this situation would materialize, I am equally confident in my analysis that this new war will lead to America’s greatest foreign policy disaster to date. Neither war with Syrian nor ISIL will be decisive, successful, or lead to greater security for the American people. However, the war may indeed turn out to lead to America’s unwinding as the world’s sole superpower and economic bankruptcy. This post will continue my analysis on the on-going crisis unfolding in the Middle East respective of Obama’s newest war. Read more
Obama Administration is carrying out Bio-Terrorism inside the USA
Leprosy
A conversation with Americans that watch the news regularly would reveal they are aware and worried about terrorism and Ebola coming to the US. Their fears are not unfounded, but profoundly biased by sensationalized coverage that has been heavily edited by those with political motives. To illustrate this point, the threat of terrorists using a biological weapon in the US strikes fear into the heart of Americans, but outside of a small use of anthrax, this threat has never materialized. However, what if I told you literally tens of thousands of Americans have died and millions have been sickened by a deliberate biological attack. Wouldn’t that on-going attack generate far more fear, outrage, and a sense of urgency to act? You would think, but it hasn’t. In fact, as I write this post, millions of Americans have been sickened and or killed by a host of diseases that were once thought eradicated in the US. Further, new illnesses are spreading to the US that were either non-existent in the US or extremely rare. How could this be one should ask. The answer is simple. A deliberate government policy that ignores the safety and security of the American people, while undermining the nation’s sovereignty has been put in place and allowed to exist by both Republicans and Democrats vying for greater political power. Read more
Putin versus Obama Part I: Are they really so different?
Much of the rhetoric behind the push to create a new Cold War centers on Russian President Vladimir Putin. The complicit media and the Obama Administration have pulled no punches in smearing President Putin and casting him as the most evil of tyrants and a political thug imprisoning opposition, seizing assets, enriching himself on the government’s dime, and intimidating reporters and political dissidents. In fact, much of this is probably true; however, before we cast the first stone and judge Putin as evil incarnate and start World War III, perhaps some national retrospection of our own actions and character would be in order. Let’s step back and evaluate America’s actions and consider whether or not we may have lost the moral high ground and then,…just perhaps, should rethink our policy, attitudes, and actions toward Russia. Read more
The Disenfranchisement of America and the Plan to Reverse It
The Constitution says that the number of representatives shall not exceed one representative for every 30,000 constituents. This ratio was roughly equal to the actual ratio of representatives to the population at the time the Constitution was ratified. However, today, most states have less than one representative per 700,000 people. The result of this massive dilution of federal representation in Congress has been a near total disenfranchisement of the population and consolidation of power within two establishment political parties. In order to begin restoring the balance of power to the people, breaking the party gridlock within Congress, and restoring liberty we must build popular support to overturn the arbitrary limit of 435 representatives set in 1929. The sooner we build awareness and draw media attention to this issue, the greater the pressure will be on Congress to increase its size and begin to return the power to their constituents.
To begin, for a republic such as the United States to have a functioning representative government, there must be adequate and real representation of the citizen body. The representatives must be answerable to their constituents and not political parties. The notion today that a single representative can adequately represent the interests of over 700,000 people is lunacy normalized through decades of slowly eroding the individual’s political value to the point of nonexistence. Further, the faux representation perpetrated upon the American people today has only been possible because politicians realize that their power is proportional to the number of people they represent. The exact opposite is true for citizens. The fewer citizens that are represented by a single representative, the more direct representation and influence the citizen possesses.
The Founding Fathers of the United States had much to say on the topic of what fair representation at the federal level would look like. James Madison understood the danger of too few dictating to the many and adequately summarized his thoughts as the smaller the House, relative to the total population, the greater is the risk of unethical collusion or myopic groupthink. In contrast, “Numerous bodies … are less subject to venality and corruption.” [James Madison, 14-August-1789] Federalist Paper Number 56 (February 19, 1788) describes this ratio stating, “…it seems to give the fullest assurance, that a representative for every THIRTY THOUSAND INHABITANTS will render the [House of Representatives] both a safe and competent guardian of the interests which will be confided to it.” Note that the number “THIRTY THOUSAND” was capitalized in the papers for emphasis.
Melancton Smith’s observations deserve special attention as he, perhaps more than any of the other delegates to the Federal Convention, understood the gravity of the situation. He knew that the power to determine the number of representatives could not be left to the ruling elite, which all too often become addicted to power. This would be “a power inconsistent with every principle of a free government, to leave it to the discretion of the rulers to determine the number of representatives of the people. There was no kind of security except in the integrity of the men who were entrusted; and if you have no other security, it is idle to contend about constitutions.” [Melancton Smith] Smith elaborates on his valid and time proven point that we cannot expect the House to unilaterally increase the number of representatives. “To me it appears clear, that the relative weight of influence of the different states will be the same, with the number of representatives at sixty-five as at six hundred, and that of the individual members greater; for each member’s share of power will decrease as the number of the House of Representatives increases. If, therefore, this maxim be true, that men are unwilling to relinquish powers which they once possess, we are not to expect the House of Representatives will be inclined to enlarge the numbers. The same motive will operate to influence the President and Senate to oppose the increase of the number of representatives; for, in proportion as the House of Representatives is augmented, they will feel their own power diminished. It is, therefore, of the highest importance that a suitable number of representatives should be established by the Constitution.” [Melancton Smith]
Alexander Hamilton, an opponent of writing limits on representation into the Constitution, provides interesting insights into his logic. For starters, it appears he neither conceived nor intended the federal government to have the sweeping powers that it possesses today. “The subject on which this argument of a small representation has been most plausibly used, is taxation. As to internal taxation, in which the difficulty principally rests, it is not probable that any general regulation will originate in the national legislature.” [Alexander Hamilton] How Hamilton would have reacted to the reality of the Federal Income Tax, Obama Care, and the litany of other internal taxes levied since the ratification of the Constitution is anyone’s guess, but based on his above statement, one could surmise he would have altered his position on the need to include specific representational limits in the Constitution. This conclusion is further supported by Hamilton’s statements respective of his belief that the federal government’s powers were limited and would never extend into one’s private life. “The powers of the new government are general, and calculated to embrace the aggregate interests of the Union, and the general interest of each state, so far as it stands in relation to the whole. … Were the laws of the Union to new-model the internal police of any state; were they to alter, or abrogate at a blow, the whole of its civil and criminal institutions; were they to penetrate the recesses of domestic life, and control, in all respects, the private conduct of individuals,—there might be more force in the objection; and the same Constitution, which was happily calculated for one state, might sacrifice the welfare of another.” [Alexander Hamilton] Of course we know now that the federal government has grown so oppressive and omnipresent as to invade every aspect of one’s private life. As such, Hamilton’s grounds for objection, however implausible he may have believed them to be at the time, turned out to be the very grounds that time has proven most required the Constitution to dictate an equitable ratio of representatives to constituents.
Based on the rather clear intent of the individuals ratifying the Constitution, one may wonder how did the number of Representatives become fixed at 435? The answer is rather simple; because Congress passed a bill in 1929. The bill sought to prescribe a national policy under which the membership of the House shall never exceed 435 unless Congress, by affirmative action, overturns the formula and abandons the policy enunciated by this bill. Respective of the number 435, there is no real reason other than that was the number of representatives at the time and the House found it advantageous to their political power to limit the growth further. Of course the population of the United States has massively grown since 1929, which in effect increased the representation ratio to such an astronomically large number that the mere notion of representation was utterly destroyed. However, this has only bolstered the power of the representatives and political parties, which have gerrymandered districts to the point of making the election of independent, grassroots connected representatives nearly impossible. Except for those who are independently wealthy, election and reelection campaigns in super-sized districts require that the representatives raise huge sums of money on a nearly continuous basis. This makes representatives beholden to the parties and big donors that funded their campaign instead of the constituents they purportedly are there to represent. In short, this allows special interests, lobbyists, and other corrupting elements to highjack the representative.
To put the state of disenfranchisement in perspective, it is worth noting that Russia as compared to the United States has over 50% better representation of its people. In fact, the United States has the second worst ratio of population to House representative in the world. Surely as the “leader of the free world” the United States could muster better representation.
Challenging this notion one may surmise that a larger House would result in even more gridlock in Congress. However, with an approval rating consistently below 10% and the inability to so much as even pass a budget, it would be hard to imagine a more dysfunctional Congress. Further, if the above maxim that a smaller legislative body would be much more productive held true, then the Senate would certainly be very efficient. However, the Senate is as dysfunctional as the House when it comes to operation. In fact, there are rarely more than a handful of Congressmen from any chamber present during session and even fewer actually engaged in meaningful debate. In part, this is because the work of the Congress is broke down into committees, which would be no different if the House increased its numbers. As for anyone that doubts a large body could pass legislation, California is often used as proof this is untrue. In fact, California has for decades effectively voted on hundreds of propositions. If the millions of people in California can effectively vote on legislative initiatives, it should be simple for even ten thousand representatives to vote on similar legislation. Naysayers may also point out that the government is too big already and adding more Congressmen will just make it worse. This is also untrue and in fact just the opposite would most likely be the outcome. As the number of representatives increase, Congress will have to become more representative of the people. The House will be more, not less motivated to reduce the size of the government. This is because the representative will be far more accountable to their constituents, which will be much better able to monitor their actions. It is also worth noting that an increase in actual representatives may be closer to an overall neutral growth in government employees because fewer staff members are required to support smaller districts, which would balance against larger staffs to support larger districts.
Each state is guaranteed at least one representative, no matter what its population. States with a single member in the U.S. House of Representatives are Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming. The District of Columbia has a non-voting delegate in Congress who has all the powers and rights of a representative, but is not permitted to vote. Currently, the approximate number of constituents to a representative is around 705,000. If the ratio was closer to 1:50,000 we would have a House with about 6,100 representatives. This increase could be dealt with by regionalization of Congress much like the Federal Court Districts, which could have interactive debate via the web and electronic voting. It would also mean your vote once again counted and you would have real influence at what approximated to what most experience at the state level of politics. It would once again be difficult for any one party to control Congress. It would be even more difficult for special interests, big businesses, and lobbyists to buy off Congress simply due to the sheer number or representatives, which would require immensely large sums of money and unavailable financial and manpower resources to gain a majority of support for pork legislation. The result would be a more accountable, more effective, and more representative Congress.
The notion that we could once again have realistic representation in Congress is not a pipe dream. It is an obtainable goal that is well within the feasible realm of effective change initiatives liberty minded citizens can unite around. We must build the awareness of the population that the status quo is unacceptable and that the 1929 law that disenfranchised us today must be overturned. We need to all write our Congressmen, get on talk shows and radio, use social media, and empower the grassroots movements around this nation to take this goal on as a part of the platform.
By Guiles Hendrik
December 9, 2013
All rights reserved
The Debates in the Federal Convention
August 6, 1787
As the proportions of numbers in different States will alter from time to time; as some of the States may hereafter be divided; as others may be enlarged by addition of territory; as two or more States may be united; as new States will be erected within the limits of the United States, the Legislature shall, in each of these cases, regulate the number of representatives by the number of inhabitants, according to the provisions herein after made, at the rate of one for every forty thousand.
— Reported by James Madison
