Can We Fix Politics?

[BlueOrange]

Yep. The US Constitution has never been changed in 230-some years....

Let me know when you’ve fixed voter suppression, gerrymandering, the officially endorsed two-party system…

Or maybe just have a look at the countries that have already fixed those problems.

[Notorious]

Speaking as an outsider to American politics. I will say the binary choice which gets forced on Americans every 4 years is nothing short of ridiculous. There are very radical extremists on both ends whose ideas trend on twitter enough that not treating them as gospel is considered controversial, and politicians, being allergic to controversy acquiese to these extremes.

"Abolish the police" is a good catch phrase, it rings true for any adult with a healthy distrust of authority, but if you take it on face value and really THINK about it, it's a TERRIBLE idea. It's an example of the left going insane.

But... there's a difference between that and republicans. Republicans literally just took away women's right to MEDICAL AUTONOMY OVER THEIR OWN BODIES. And... OH YEAH, ATTEMPTED A COUP.

They are literally subverting trust in democracy by alleging ELECTORAL FRAUD with NO ACTUAL EVIDENCE, and attempting to IMPOSE A BARELY FUNCTIONAL IMMATURE RACIST MORON as a dictator, simply for political expedience and to institute their idiotic religious moralism as law.

I can understand disagreeing with democrats on some fundamental issues, I do, most people do, but we cannot look at the ACTUAL SUBVERSION OF DEMOCRACY as an acceptable response to anything the democrats are doing.

Totally agree here from start to finish, I just don't think that Trump is a dictator because I don't think he has the balls for it and I do think that there was some voter fraud. They may not have the evidence, but to believe that in an election where both candidates are breaking RECORDS at the voting booth(both outvoting OBAMA by millions of votes) and that neither of them had any voter fraud going on is incredibly naive. I think there was cheating on both sides for SURE, we're just never going to have the evidence to support that and it doesn't matter anyway when both sides are cheating fucks. It's not like we should be happier to elect the one who cheated LESS right? My problem with the media is the shit-filled narrative they paint for people, and everyone knows that the media kowtows to the Left like nobody's business. In fact it's so blatant that I can't even take anyone seriously who would argue it. The only real exceptions are Fox and that... Sky News whatever channel I came across in the past, but I can't remember if that's the right name? That one seemed to be growing, but I don't really know much about it. Saw it mentioned in a youtube video or two. But anyway with the exception of these two clown cars of conservative "political pundits" that they claim they are, there is only the Left. So when social media and politics are so heavily inundated with left leaning opinions, positions and political biases then you get a lot more hate focused on one side rather than ever truly being critical of all politicians.

I don't need a bunch of crying, glaringly biased Liberal mouthpieces on CNN, MSNBC, etc, to tell me why the Republicans suck. I already know they suck. That's why I SPRINTED... away from the Republican party that I was pretty much born into. But when I found myself on the left side of the political spectrum I realized that there was an absolutely suffocating amount of hypocrisy on that side as well. That's why I'm an independent voter and it's why I haven't voted in like a decade. Because I can see the bullshit plastered all over tv at the expense of the Republicans, but I've got to look far harder to see the Democrats being exposed for their faults, of which their are many, namely because they have a lot of people in the media running cover for them. That's why when I start a conversation like this hoping that people can at the very least admit the faults of whichever side of the political spectrum that they're aligned with and then I just get the same old "Fuck the Republicans. Fuck conservatives. Fuck old people and they're going to die anyway and they'll bring their shitty ways of thinking with them", then I just immediately check out. Because if I wanted that kind of bullshit then I need only find CNN on my tv... so what's the point? I've already got that all day and night if I want it and it's just a couple clicks away.

I started this conversation in the interest of figuring out how we make things better, and given the general "fuck the right" sentiment it just lends absolutely no value to anything besides reinforcing the "right = bad" way of thinking. Unless someone wants to bite the bullet and admit that they really do think the right is the root of all evil and it should be destroyed then we're just sitting here dancing around the hardest things to say besides what's NORMAL... to say. And what's normal to say is "fuck the right. they're pure evil" and yet you say that and nothing ever changes. You just go on hating them forever. Why? From where I'm sitting this all just seems to be a continuation of the stories they run on Liberal media stations about how awful their opposition is, but it doesn't fix shit. It just gives you something to bitch about and someone to hate... and you already hate the right today ANYWAY, right? So then you're going to hate them tomorrow, you'll hate them a week from now, a month from now, a year from now, and ten years from now when they've been inevitably tugged just a little further to the left again and again, every single day, it still won't be enough for anyone on the Left because the Republicans will always drag their ass and be called monsters for trying to resist change. It's pointless.

Leaves me feeling a whole lot more like saying, "Eh, fuck it. People are going to find a way to destroy themselves one way or another anyway, and when one of them who is particularly good at it takes me and everyone else with them then we'll at least be done with all the bullshit. Then we can all shut the fuck up. Maybe try again in another life or something." because that's what happens when you wake up every fucking day with nothing but hate in your heart for anyone who thinks differently than you do(and don't deny that there are WAY too many people in the world who just have this absolutely viral, obnoxious hatred for anyone who thinks differently than they do, because they're all over the place these days. We have more political extremists than ever around the world these days). Do not insult me or anyone else's intelligence and tell me that isn't the case, because many of us are stuck here in the United States which appears to be falling apart, and like I said before that effects the entire world, not just the United States. The land where we all hate one another and want nothing but destruction for our political counterparts, at least in regards to the way we act towards one another. Such to the point that we can say "god those fucking republicans are so stupid and extreme to have done what they did on January 6th." and then forget to criticize their own idiot, political allies who fucked up their own country for like two years worth of protests that costed us billions in taxes and that is still being repaired even now, even going as far as to burn small, local businesses to the ground while looting, fighting and causing chaos that people just excuse as "the country is hurting right now"... and maybe a few people needed a new tv... Oh, and lets not forget them burning the church on federal property a few years back and the group of protestors who tore down some of the Whitehouse fencing and ripped down a guard tower. But hey, they had their good reasons I'm sure, right? That's not insurrection. Come on. That was just a few people... and they were trying to make a point... they had their reasons because they felt unheard...

Bullshit. I'm so tired of listening to Republicans being obscenely charitable to "their own kind" to say it like some half-brained redneck when some fucking ridiculous shit pops off and they catch hell for it, and the same goes for the Democrats. If I can't stand on the same side of the line with you and criticize you fairly and constructively then there's nothing to talk about. Because problems don't get fixed when you sweep one child's malfeasance under the fucking rug and THEN punish the other kid for twice the infractions... that's fucking nuts to me, and so many people just can't parse that out. That or they're so obsessed with "their team winning" that they just don't fucking care, and that's FAR... FAR worse because that's more along the lines of the political extremists.

If you think for a second that "I'm on the good side" of the political spectrum then you are lying to yourself. And your inability to be critical of yourself or your own side of the political spectrum shows the glaring arrogance that is the typical American personality and is the reason that this country is going to fall apart all the more swiftly. When it does, though, hopefully you'll have the backbone to, at the very least, admit to yourself that it was in some ways also YOUR fault that this all fell apart. I'm in the middle isle and I'm even willing to admit that about myself. That maybe I was part of the problem too, and that's something I'll have to deal with for me. I can tell I've failed to have any valuable impact just reading this conversation because of how one sided the criticism is, but I can also say that at least I tried to offer something constructive before I failed. That's enough for me as long as we're all on the same, fucked up, hole laden, sinking ship.

Hold your breath and swims as far as you can, though, and maybe there'll be something to salvage.

[GloomCookie]

This is precisely why I'm always a bit hesitant to come into PROC because I'm conservative leaning. I'm not 100% in agreement with Republicans, but because I'm not a card-carrying member of the Democrats, I've been treated like I'm garbage, that I'm a shitty human being. I'm fed up with it, honestly. Neither party really aligns with me perfectly, but I can't stand the Democratic party and their preaching that they're the moral authority.

I hear about things like AOC and Elizabeth Warren calling for checks on the Supreme Court. YOU ARE THE CHECK ON THE SUPREME COURT. It's in the Constitution, read it! But then I hear about assholes like Tom Cotton who represents my state, who pens open letters for Israel and has openly gotten checks from them, and stages his town halls to avoid any topics he isn't ready to answer. He's a small, yappy dog hoping to impress his masters, and I will never vote for him.

Then I get comments like

Let me know when you’ve fixed voter suppression, gerrymandering, the officially endorsed two-party system…

Or maybe just have a look at the countries that have already fixed those problems.

I will look at those other countries, I will publicly acknowledge some systems work better and we could do better, but we are not the same countries. What works in your country may not work in ours. You have to undertand this. Our system is not the same as yours, and that's OK! Just because you're pissed, doesn't mean we need to burn everything to the ground.

I'm tired of the same old complaints. The US doesn't work the way *I* want it to, so I would rather burn it all down. Well grow up. It doesn't work the way I want, but that's why I vote. I'm one person, and my wishes should not dictate to you what is and isn't allowed. Our system works. It doesn't work the best, but it works. Change takes time, and we have a system for making those changes.

I can't wait for someone to tell me I'm a shitty human being *again*, but I've said my piece.

[Notorious]

This is precisely why I'm always a bit hesitant to come into PROC because I'm conservative leaning. I'm not 100% in agreement with Republicans, but because I'm not a card-carrying member of the Democrats, I've been treated like I'm garbage, that I'm a shitty human being. I'm fed up with it, honestly. Neither party really aligns with me perfectly, but I can't stand the Democratic party and their preaching that they're the moral authority.

I hear about things like AOC and Elizabeth Warren calling for checks on the Supreme Court. YOU ARE THE CHECK ON THE SUPREME COURT. It's in the Constitution, read it! But then I hear about assholes like Tom Cotton who represents my state, who pens open letters for Israel and has openly gotten checks from them, and stages his town halls to avoid any topics he isn't ready to answer. He's a small, yappy dog hoping to impress his masters, and I will never vote for him.

Then I get comments like I will look at those other countries, I will publicly acknowledge some systems work better and we could do better, but we are not the same countries. What works in your country may not work in ours. You have to undertand this. Our system is not the same as yours, and that's OK! Just because you're pissed, doesn't mean we need to burn everything to the ground.

I'm tired of the same old complaints. The US doesn't work the way *I* want it to, so I would rather burn it all down. Well grow up. It doesn't work the way I want, but that's why I vote. I'm one person, and my wishes should not dictate to you what is and isn't allowed. Our system works. It doesn't work the best, but it works. Change takes time, and we have a system for making those changes.

I can't wait for someone to tell me I'm a shitty human being *again*, but I've said my piece.

Extremely well said. I appreciate these comments a lot because they support my standpoint that Democrats have an extraordinarily high opinion of themselves. I, personally, detest the Republican party as well, but for a number of very valid reasons, just like the valid reason that I distrust the Democratic party that lies, panders, grandstands and spouts their empty platitudes down from their pristine, ivory pedestals. These glorious, moral authorities that wag their fingers and warn us to comply and "be good and listen to us". Fuck them. It's them who are to blame for most of the bullshit going on in the world to begin with. I don't care if they're a dinosaur like McConnall and Pelosi or they're the young, typically sassy, obnoxious types like AOC. They're all just as bad.

They constantly tip toe and they are absolutely NEVER transparent. They are NEVER truly honest with the American people. So when I hear a heavily one sided criticism of the Republicans and ONLY the Republicans, even though those criticisms are well deserved typically, it still makes my stomach churn to hear that same group of individuals talk about the Democrats as if they have any integrity at all. The idea that really any of them have any integrity at all is a complete joke, and when you've come to the decision that one side of the political class in America should bear ALL of the blame for everything that's shitty it exposes you in way. Shows everyone that you're not interested in being constructive. You're only interested in trying to demonize about half of America as the unsavory, the untouchable, the untrustworthy. The right are not the deplorables that you might think, though. It's the politicians who deserve to have their actions and comments called into question. They're the ones who should suffer the scrutiny of their own devious plots to turn this country against itself, because they have done that to unbelievable effect in recent decades. There's never been more hatred between the right and the left than there is today.

[TheGlyphstone]

Firstly,
*hugs Cookie*

You're not a terrible human being, and no one here whose opinions I place any value upon think you are either. To the contrary, you and a very small handful of others (Keelan, and some others I cant name off the top of my head) are the only conservatives here on E who can express their positions without being hostile and combative, and I think that means a lot even to most of the people who might otherwise disagree with you.

That said, ignoring the conspiracy theory-laden nihilism of previous posts because I have no idea how to unpack that, the topic of Can We Fix (American) Politics?

Maybe? I don't see any easy solution, but the first step is unpacking the problems.

For the non-Americans, the obstacle to understand is that the structure of our government is very, very hard to change by design, especially when it comes to centralizing federal authority. The Founding Fathers were very leery of a strong federal government, in no small part because it was part of what led to their rebellion in the first place. So while they did have the foresight to build in mechanisms of change, they intentionally hamstrung the process to make it hard .

What they didn't anticipate or plan for, the seeds of the rotten tree we have no, were political parties. Electors were meant to be independent and trusted with their judgement, and candidates were not supposed to run in pairs. These assumptions unraveled almost immediately after the country was born, but the fix was in by then. Now electors pledged to their party, and the winner-take all system prevalent in 48 of 50 states, is nothing like what they originally set in motion. As it exists, the Electoral College artificially inflates the power of small states (despite their actual political influence being negligible), at the cost of essentially invalidating the votes of millions of people. If you're a Democrat in Texas, or a Republican in California, you might as well just stay home for all the value your vote actually carries. And that is a problem.

Gerrymandering, as multiple people have brought up here, is also a problem in that it invalidates the votes of large swathes of people, deliberately.

Unfortunately fixing either of them would require an act of Congress, and neither party has any motivation because they both benefit from gerrymandering on their turf.

Which leads me, ultimately, to the big Kahuna of the issue - partisan rancor. Partisanship and tribalism in America has devolved to only a few steps above gang warfare. Congress is essentially paralyzed because nothing can be done without a filibuster breaking majority, since crossing the aisle is political suicide. Even when it would be something voters agree on, the idea of joining with 'the enemy' is terrible enough that it outweighs any benefit.

FiveThirtyEight had a good article recently that I'll try to dig up, about how a lack of competitively political seats (created by gerrymandering, among other things) leads to polarization and extremism, which further encourages anticompetitive seats in a nasty ouroboros loop.

So in summary, the system is broken because it depends on a certain degree of bipartisanship (again intentionally, to prevent a tyranny of the majority), which has become poison. But fixing it would require overcoming that poison. Maybe there is an answer, but I cant see one that won't either take a very very long time, or involve massive amounts of strife.


Edit: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-we-lose-when-we-lose-competitive-congressional-districts/

[Larkyuu]

I admittedly don't understand much of the intricacies of politics and how the wheels and cogs work behind the scene. But, it's been interesting and insightful to read what others have been thinking and feeling. I relate to Gloom's sentiment in that I don't feel like I fit in anywhere, but I certainly don't want anything to do with Dems anymore after how much that party has lied to, guilted, and coerced me for who I am and what I believe. You are not alone, Gloom, and I sympathize with you and the ways you've been treated by distasteful people.

I don't think I'd be able to say everything I want to say, so I'll try to be short and sweet with it. Bear in mind these are just my thoughts and what I have gathered from what I have seen and experienced.

The biggest problem that needs fixing, I think, is how voters and the general public are being manipulated artificially to dishonestly sway votes. Voters and citizens of this country are also being pitted against each other and have begun seeing other citizens as the enemy. Of course, there is also the issue of what corruption and failures are present with the government systems and officials, but I know much less about that sort of thing, and I wouldn't know how that could be fixed. I also just simply believe the people are the heart of any country, and so if there is something that plagues the people, that is my biggest concern. How can we better take care of the heart of this country? I think:

1. Stop the lying in news/media and in research. No more major news outlets poisoning the minds of the general public with lies about crimes that didn't happen, or lying about the reasons those crimes happened, or lying about the people that committed/were victims of the crime. We need the objective truth and the objective truth only in news and in research. Leave the gossip to the blogs and clubs for people to do in their own time, but don't construct their reality for them artificially. Don't skew numbers or tamper results of science or research either, which is starting to become more common these days sadly.

2. The obsession with identities needs to calm down. It's gotten to the point of manipulating votes dishonestly. People have been manipulated into adopting their political views as their intrinsic identity, which then means political disagreements are viewed as personal attacks and hatespeech, and then means that people who don't agree politically are the worst of the worst and need to be discarded by society, and that's where division comes from. People have been disowned and cut off from their closest family and friends because their family cared more about what that person voted than the fact that that person is their family. Furthermore, intrinsic identities like race, sexuality, etc. are not tied to your politics. "If you're this identity, you need to vote this way or you're a bad person" is coercion and it's bullshit. Stop the life ruination and demonization of people because they chose a political group based off of what they believe as opposed to a trait about themselves that they can't change that has nothing to do with their character. Black/gay/trans/whatever conservatives and Republicans aren't "self-hating traitors." Don't try to push them into boxes they don't want to be in and let them be individuals with their own merits and ideas. The coercion and threats that you could lose your family or your job if you don't vote X way has made voters vote for people they don't actually want to or not vote at all when they do want to.

This point on dividing people and manipulating them especially begun concerning me once I started hearing the stories and firsthand accounts of people who survived terrible regimes and how they wanted to warn America against turning into those places; i.e. Yuri Bezmenov, a KGP defector (short clip or full interview with him from the 80s), or Lily Tang Williams, a woman who was born in raised in Maoist China (interviewed here on her experiences) and is now running for Congress. Even if I'm just an idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about at all, I'd still recommend listening to these interviews and other interviews like them. The more perspectives, the better, and hopefully we can avoid repeating history of other countries' mistakes before it's too late.

Once people can be free to see the whole truth and vote without being threatened or coerced that they'll be doxxed or lose their families or jobs just for advocating for what they believe in, then I would think the American people could start to see through the bullshit of corrupt politicians and start making the changes they really want, and not what those politicians and agendas want them to want.

[Vekseid]

Attempts at equivocation are generally wanting.

"Sure, the Republicans are refusing to investigate or prosecute an actual coup attempt. But did you read Hillary's emails? She asked after the well-being of an Arab girl!"

"Sure, my information about child molestation is sourced from a site built by 4chan refugees because 4chan was too harsh on child porn for them. But did you know Nancy Pelosi tried to refuse a Congressional stock trading ban?"

"Sure, I vote for policies which have been proven to drive communist ideologies for nearly two centuries now, but you can trust this former KGB agent who said in the 80s it's because they infiltrated our universities!"



I am supposed to find 'but Democrats did bad things too!' remotely persuasive, while Republicans are openly attacking the legal framework under which I can operate Elliquiy?

[BlueOrange]

Then I get comments like I will look at those other countries, I will publicly acknowledge some systems work better and we could do better, but we are not the same countries. What works in your country may not work in ours. You have to undertand this. Our system is not the same as yours, and that's OK! Just because you're pissed, doesn't mean we need to burn everything to the ground.

I’m desperately hoping that the USA can find a way forward that doesn’t involve burning things to the ground. Indeed, I see “Installing modern voting practices” as the best realistic defense against burning things to the ground. If people believe their votes are meaningful and powerful, that should reduce their perception that they need to burn things to the ground.

The world needs the USA to come through this crisis as peacefully as possible. You have too many nukes for ‘burning the place to the ground’ to be remotely acceptable.

[Notorious]

I’m desperately hoping that the USA can find a way forward that doesn’t involve burning things to the ground. Indeed, I see “Installing modern voting practices” as the best realistic defense against burning things to the ground. If people believe their votes are meaningful and powerful, that should reduce their perception that they need to burn things to the ground.

The world needs the USA to come through this crisis as peacefully as possible. You have too many nukes for ‘burning the place to the ground’ to be remotely acceptable.

Honestly if the United States allowed itself to get bogged down in a hectic, hot conflict civil war I'm pretty sure some other country that can't stand the US would just take a shit on us while all of the infighting is going on. It seems like a great chance to take advantage of us, but who knows.

[BlueOrange]

I am supposed to find 'but Democrats did bad things too!' remotely persuasive, while Republicans are openly attacking the legal framework under which I can operate Elliquiy?

I find it effective to concede the obvious: my team (the left) is not perfect. A lot of us are assholes. Some of us are corrupt. A small minority say some spectacularly stupid things (like “We should burn the whole place down.”) Because when I refuse to concede the obvious, my credibility is harmed.

The next question is “Is my opponent also willing to concede the obvious?” Because if they refuse to do that, then their credibility is harmed.

I think that whataboutism is never persuasive in a debate, but it’s very effective at consolidating partisan lines. So long as each side keeps on going with a chant of “What about what you did?” it’s easy to avoid meaningfully confronting the  issues.


By the way: thank you for this excellent site and its excellent administration (who have nudged me away from more than one mistake in my time here). You make an excellent and important point that the Republicans are threatening to close it down.

[TheGlyphstone]

Attacking us directly would be a terrible strategy, inviting an external enemy to re-unite against, but it'd be very likely in such a doomsday scenario that one of our geopolitical rivals or enemies would take advantage of our distraction to pursue their own ambitions.

As far as the who-is-worse/equally bad side conversation, I'm trying very hard to stay out of it even though I myself have strong opinions in that regard, because it's exactly the sort of rancor I was decrying. Just in this thread alone, I've seen multiple people who no longer believe in the GOP's message, but that lingering tribalism leads them to refuse to align with the Democrats. Once you're jumped into a gang, the idea of leaving becomes almost impossible, and openly joining the rival gang is unthinkable.


Updating voting practices, or restoring objectivity to primary media (a feedback loop in itself, as political extremism leads to increased ratings and ad revenue), are both steps along the road to fixing the issue, but I still find us circling back to the how - how do we do this when the institutions capable of doing so don't want to because it goes against their own self-interest or beliefs.

[BlueOrange]

Honestly if the United States allowed itself to get bogged down in a hectic, hot conflict civil war I'm pretty sure some other country that can't stand the US would just take a shit on us while all of the infighting is going on. It seems like a great chance to take advantage of us, but who knows.

If you Google “US military spending vs world” then you’ll see that 10% of US military resources should be enough to hold off any country that isn’t China. And China would be far more likely to go after Japan if they thought the US wasn’t looking than they would be to go after the USA. (Not to mention the unifying effect that foreign wars tend to have on US politics.)

There is only one serious threat to the USA: the USA.

[BlueOrange]

Updating voting practices, or restoring objectivity to primary media (a feedback loop in itself, as political extremism leads to increased ratings and ad revenue), are both steps along the road to fixing the issue, but I still find us circling back to the how - how do we do this when the institutions capable of doing so don't want to because it goes against their own self-interest or beliefs.

The how is very important and very difficult. It would require the Democratic Party and the Republican Party to both commit to dramatically reduced power in future, and construct bipartisan ‘political suicide’ legislation while they were at it. So it would certainly not be easy.

But if a few million people agreed that they wanted it, then individual politicians might just decide that they are better served by condemning their party to death than by attempting to hold back the tide with a bucket.

It’s a thin hope. Potentially a naive hope. But it’s the best I can come up with. Having been raised by someone who sometimes came home angry that the Prime Minister was refusing to do as he was told, I consider myself well-informed about how politics works. And I wish with all of my heart that I could see an easier, faster, safer, or more effective way forward.

The good news is that “We want fair democratic elections” is one of the few demands where I think the left and right can actually agree with each other.

[greenknight]

Let me know when you’ve fixed voter suppression, gerrymandering, the officially endorsed two-party system…

Or maybe just have a look at the countries that have already fixed those problems.

I mean, it's not like the first two weren't partially abdicated by the previous SCOTUS composition. And the first past the post nature of US voting is a repudiation of the type of parliamentary system you advocate for, as is the now-informed advice of the electorate for the chief executive. It's intentional.

The fundamental flaw in this admonition is not recognizing that the US government is more akin to the EU government than, for example, the British government in function. Each state gets to decide who it sends to represent it and its interests within its allotted pool of representation. Any federal law on the subject, as we've seen by example of a less conservative SCOTUS, is DOA. A few new amendments need to be added to stop them.

The big question is under what rules do you propose to stop gerrymandering? What is the standard for a district? Is it purely geographical? Should it be based on shared interests? Control of a share of natural resources, like water rights?

There are other considerations. Australia, for example, has about 1 representative for every 173,000 people. The US is closer to 1:765,000. The UK is about 1:103,000. Increasing the size could be a good first step, but good luck getting something passed that will serve primarily to give California, New York, and Texas more representatives. The US could have upwards of 650 representatives, the size of the UK's House of Commons, but what are the logistical implications?

[Vekseid]

I think we could have nearly 900 representatives and be fine 'logistically'.

Another thing that could be passed by only amending the Constitution is to strip representatives from individual states, removing gerrymandering from the equation. They'd be elected based on a federal notion of a district rather than a state notion. This would require more federal involvement in the election process - federal ID, etc. But it may be required in any case.

Though personally I think this will only get truly resolved when things get to the point where we decide we need a new constitution.

[BlueOrange]

You could start by making it so that every vote counts, even if the person’s first choice is not a Democrat or a Republican.

https://aec.gov.au/learn/files/poster-counting-hor-pref-voting.pdf

[GloomCookie]

I think we could have nearly 900 representatives and be fine 'logistically'.

Another thing that could be passed by only amending the Constitution is to strip representatives from individual states, removing gerrymandering from the equation. They'd be elected based on a federal notion of a district rather than a state notion. This would require more federal involvement in the election process - federal ID, etc. But it may be required in any case.

Though personally I think this will only get truly resolved when things get to the point where we decide we need a new constitution.

United States Constitution Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3: ... The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each State shall have at least one Representative...

The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 capped House membership at the level established after the 1910 census and created a procedure for automatically reapportioning House seats after decennial census. This was later amended in 1941 to the current formula.

Capped at 300,000 per House member, the population in the last census was 331,893,745 (https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221). Because each state must have at least 1 Representative, the results would be: 1,120 (Link to the table: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i1q2iaCPVdjhnDTINBCWz0hx_cQY1RLR/view?usp=sharing using the data from Wikipedia for convenience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_census)

[HannibalBarca]

#1: Democrat =/= Liberal
#2: Republican =/= Conservative

Although, honestly, finding a moderate Republican is almost impossible these days.  And unlike my childhood, there are no more liberal Republicans.  Democrats still have a few conservatives (think Joe Manchin), and many, many moderates.  Leftists are much rarer in the Democratic Party than right-wing people believe.

I've never belonged to any political party as a U.S. citizen.  I was raised by conservatives, surrounded by military members, and grew up Catholic, so that establishes my bona fides as far as being immersed in conservative ideology.  By 19, though, I was moderate, and as I've grown older I have become rather well-settled in leftist ideology...and this is after decades of study in history, political science, and sociology.

I've read some people in this thread announce they are moderate or conservative...but I have yet to read what exactly they espouse as acceptable or worthy of professing as a value when it comes to conservatism.  I'm genuinely curious about what these values are.  I find a lot of ideological values that are claimed as conservative or liberal tend to be basic freedoms that everyone wants, regardless of their political stance.  What I find more often conservative, though, is the idea that only some people should be allowed to have those freedoms.

Conservatism:
1. commitment to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation.
2. the holding of political views that favor free enterprise, private ownership, and socially traditional ideas.

Liberalism:
1. willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas.
2. a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.

Oxford English Dictionary, there, though I can look back into some of my great-grandfather's 1920s political science books I still have and find the same definitions, so this isn't a case of the "woke" media (whatever that is) changing things.

I'll patiently wait to read someone's posting of the socially traditional ideas they espouse as a conservative.  I know that very few people are purely left or right, but anyone who claims to be a conservative or even a moderate should have some conservative beliefs available for perusal.

[Vekseid]

I'm not sure what you are arguing there Gloom. As I said it only requires amending the Constitution, as opposed to the consensus of all states if something were to be done with the Senate.

[GloomCookie]

I wasn't arguing, I was pointing out it's already in the Constitution that the House is supposed to have a representative for every 300,000 people. They just passed a law so they didn't have to keep adding seats to the House.

[greenknight]

I wasn't arguing, I was pointing out it's already in the Constitution that the House is supposed to have a representative for every 300,000 people. They just passed a law so they didn't have to keep adding seats to the House.

The Constitution says the House of Representatives decides its membership, apportioned by population, though no more than 1:30,000. It was never this many; even in the 1790s, that limit would put the House at up to 130 members, though they seated 105 based on the 1790 Census (likely due to the vagaries of the States' divisions of the 3.9 million US population and the counting of "three fifths of all other Persons"). Today, upwards of 11,000 Representatives could be potentially be seated (my town would have about 2), but that is not a constitutional requirement, only the limit.