You know, if it wasn't just a minority of pants-wetting, nose-picking, pearl-clutching, batshit-insane, Beckian conservatives, I'd think maybe there was something in the water or swirling around in the air that's eating people's brains. What does one do with, oh, say, something like this?
There is, of course, an important principle here, and if all of Montana's residents were black, it would be easier for everyone to see it. Montanans' votes don't count as much as Rhode Islanders' -- in fact, a Montanan's vote only counts for nearly three-fifths of a Rhode Islander's. That America's slave population was counted by the same ratio under the original Constitution is usually cited, rightly, as one of the document's greatest sins. A lawsuit filed in federal court in Mississippi last month hopes to force Congress to remedy the status quo's assault on the one-person, one-vote principle by increasing Congress to as many as a paltry 1,761 members.
Beyond principle, there are practical reasons to expand Congress. For decades, presidential candidates have promised to change the "way Washington works." But once elected, they're soon captured by their own congressional parties, which are in turn beholden to the "old bulls" and constituencies rooted in interests outside their districts.
A Congress of, say, 5,000 citizen-legislators would change that overnight. Would it cost more money? Yes. But today's huge staffs could be cut, and perks and pork might even be curtailed by using the old chewing gum rule: If there's not enough for everyone, nobody can have any.
(emphasis added)
That, b's & g's, is Jonah Goldberg in today's LAT. Bear in Mind that they fired Richard Scheer to make room for Jonah's considerable...um...non-intilekshual bulk.
Recent Comments