or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Nordstrodamus

 If I provided references to the actual studies would that matter or are you prepared to discount them before hand?  Maybe you just don't get what I mean by specific.  All committee meetings and floor debates are recorded in the congressional record.  Provide a link to specific exchange where you can say that senator X asked question "blah blah" to someone and I'll consider your example.  Otherwise you just keep asserting that important stuff happens without actually...
 Ok, first I think we can agree that Jeb (from my original example) and other extremely low vote getters, should get virtually or literally nothing.  Otherwise, you would have people running just for the chance at getting a free paycheck.  Second, I would propose that it is quite fair for John and Jane to get half the salary as they each garnered half the votes.  It's certainly a fair way to compensate the rep, but I can understand how one might suggest that it will have a...
 No, I'm unfamiliar with an example of where a sub-type of human interaction, direct face to face contact, is necessary for conducting the affairs of congress.  Just asserting that it is necessary is not an example.    No, it is not what I or you want to believe.  It is what has been demonstrated through experiment and empirical evidence.  There is abundant evidence that people are bad lie detectors.  The only people that score better than chance are those who have trained...
 I'm sorry, but I really need some specific example of either a congressional hearing or congressional debate that illustrates your point, because I am just not seeing it.    I am quite serious.  There are numerous studies that demonstrate that even trained interrogators (police, lawyers, claims investigators) do no better than chance in determining if someone is lying.  There is abundant empirical evidence of wrongful convictions based on jurors misjudging the honesty of...
 I was hoping for a specific example.  I'm not discounting the possibility that there are moments in congress where a genuine search for understanding is made.  I do believe, however, that such events are rare and not likely to be impeded by telepresence.  I've been in teleconferences before on matters of some importance and I can assure you that if I needed to know something I didn't let some static in the line prevent me from asking again.   Lastly, even if there is some...
So I might need to clarify a few things.  You would still have voting districts that are decided by the state.  You would have one vote.  You could vote for the street rep or the suburb rep in your district to send to congress to represent your interests.  If someone chooses to run on the "I represent Evergreen Terrace first and foremost" platform no special authority over Evergreen Terrace is created for them, they just aren't going to have broad appeal in the district...
So?  The question is whether it is sufficient for the requirements of congress.  Is there a specific example of some speech, debate, council meeting, or any other event in congress that could not have been equally effective (or ineffective as the case may be) if done by teleconferencing.   My take is that, as it stands today, everything done publicly in congress is done for public consumption.  Reps do not ask questions of their fellow congressmen because of genuine...
 Even if every single American elected to be his or her own representative it would still involve far less transactions of voting in a year's worth of congress than occurs in a millisecond on wall street.   But the reality is that most people would not want to be that involved. I certainly don't want to spend my time reading through every proposed change to the tax code or regulations on transport of citrus fruit or whatever.
 My idea would not increase the size of the federal government.  If anything it would reduce it because you would not need to house and transport the representatives.  As far as having a representative per suburb or block, I'm guessing you were specifically responding to Floorjack's post here, but I can interject that under my proposal it would be up to the voter to choose how local his/her rep needs to be.  I imagine we would still have voting districts, but nothing would...
 Although my proposal doesn't specifically change the size or influence of the federal government, it does address one of your concerns.  Under my proposal you could make anyone you want a representative (provided they run).  If you want someone you see in actual life then just ask him/her to run, vote for them, and they then represent your vote and whoever else voted for them.
New Posts  All Forums: