We Need More Representatives In The House Of Representatives

Oh, Con, there you go again. Con listed many inaccuracies during this debate, and I’ll scratch the surface by listing a few of more egregious ones here. In R2, Con said that “the Republican party has held control of the house[sic] for the last 10 elections in a row.” The Democrats had a majority in the House from 2006-2010. http://www.washingtonpost.com... The Republicans have not held a majority in the House for the last 10 elections. Con’s statement is not true. In R2, Con said that states cannot award electors on any other basis except a winner-take-all basis. But, I provided evidence to show that both Kansas & Maine currently award their electors on a proportional basis. Con’s statement is not true. In R2, Con described outcomes of a Senate candidate when the resolution of this debate was “we need more Representatives in the House of Representatives.” Con’s statements about Senate approvals would not have any bearing on the House of Representatives as they are a separate house of legislature. Con’s statement is not true. In the last round, Con said that “Senators serve the exact same role as Representatives, just on a larger scale.” Con’s statement is not true. Senators have exclusive right to ratify treaties, confirm Cabinet nominees & Supreme Court Justices, and to try (not initiate) Impeachment proceedings. I’m sorry Con, but the House does not have these powers! http://system.uslegal.com... In addition, the House has sole authority to initiate (not try) Impeachment proceedings & to start all revenue bills. Con, surely you know that the Senate does not have these powers? http://www.britannica.com... I believe that Con’s incorrect statement about the GOP winning the last 10 Congressional elections, Con’s incorrect assumption about the awarding of Electors in the Electoral College, Con’s incorrect statements about the function of the Senate & the House of Representatives being equal, and the many other misstatements made in this debate by Con have created a foundation upon which Con has based a woefully inaccurate analysis of this debate topic. Con twice said that individuals like their own Congressman, but do not like everyone else’s. Con does not take into consideration the effects of gerrymandering which would create districts that are drawn to favor an incumbent by cherry picking the voting pool. Con moved away from the argument that smaller Congressional districts would reduce the effect of gerrymandering and, as I have pointed out in R2, bring the Congressman to become more accountable to their own respective constituencies. Con continued to make the centerpiece of his argument that more Representatives would not bring diverse viewpoints by specifically claiming that new Representatives would “a bunch of old white men.” How does Con know that all new members would automatically both be “a bunch of old white men” and that “a bunch of old white men”, or any group of new Representatives, would all vote the same way? Con continued to argue that more Representatives would automatically vote in line with their party affiliation and only more gridlock would ensue. But those who have first-hand experience in a debate on DDO know that more voters will settle gridlock, and that more voters do not always vote in lock-step with each other. Voters are not bound to vote in a particular manner on a DDO debate; in fact, many times when individuals ask for voters to counter a perceived vote-bomb they find out that the new voter agrees with the prior voter and the point spread widens. Sometimes, a new voter does not agree with the prior voter and the vote is countered. Asking for more voters does not guarantee a vote for the requester anymore than it guarantees a vote for the opponent; more voters just bring more opinions into the debate. Just as more voters do not automatically bring in “a bunch of old white men” in DDO, more Representatives would not automatically bring in “a bunch of old white men” into the House of Representatives. More voters do not create more gridlock in DDO; in actuality, more voters actually settle gridlock because more people came to a conclusion on a debate. We should have more opinions in the House of Representatives and more Representatives will accomplish what we already set out to do in DDO. Why would Con be against having more viewpoints in Congress, when we often ask for more viewpoints on a DDO debate? If we believe that a DDO debate is important enough to warrant more viewpoints, then why would we not want more viewpoints on debates regarding laws that affect everyone in the US? Summary Despite the inaccurate statements, accusations, Gish Gallops, and other debate monkeyshines lobbed by Con, the resolution remains simple, clear and undisputed: we need more Representatives in the House of Representatives. More Representatives would add more voices to the process. More Representatives would bring more diverse viewpoints, and more diversity, to a Congress that is not currently representative of Americans in terms of gender, income, & wealth. More Representatives would create smaller districts that are more accountable to their constituencies instead of towards outside fundraising interests. And, more Representatives would increase the size of the Electoral College to stop the 9% disparity between the popular vote and Electoral College as referenced by Con in his R2 argument. I will end my arguments by asking the DDO voters to think of their own first-hand experiences on DDO and with voting outcomes. More voters can, and will, shape the outcome of the debate. More voters can, and will, vote their conscience and do not vote in lock step with each other. More voters can, and will, bring a diversity of viewpoints which are not all the same even if Con says that more voters will be “a bunch of old white men.” And, more voters can, and will, create a consensus that is more broadly accepted by the population as a whole just as we’ve seen on DDO. President Lincoln said “that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.”http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org... More Representatives must be added to the House of Representatives to keep pace with our growing population. It is the only way that we fulfill Lincoln’s vision for our government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and to ensure that our laws are decided upon by a group of Representative Americans. To accomplish these ends, we need more Representatives in the House of Representatives.