Constructionism

Features Versus Bugs, and the Double-Edged Sword

Posted on Updated on

How many of you have, lately, complained about how Congress is constantly bickering and never gets things done of any real substance? If your hand is raised, this article is for you. It’s to explain to you exactly why you’re what’s wrong with America.

Let’s turn the clocks back to 1787…

Strange things are afoot at the Circle K.
Strange things are afoot at the Circle K.

The Founding Fathers had a bit of a quandary on their hands when it came to designing how Congress should work.

Virginia suggested a two-chamber legislature, both of which would contain representatives apportioned out by population, with the upper chamber’s members nominated by state governments and approved by the lower chamber. Deleware objected, feeling this would give the larger, more highly-populated states dominance in both chambers.

New Jersey put forth the idea of a single-chamber legislature, with each state having equal power.

The Connecticut delegation came up with an artful solution: a lower chamber, the House of Representatives, with delegates directly elected by the people and apportioned by population, and an upper chamber, the Senate, with each state having equal representation and with delegates appointed by state governments.

And with the plan in place, the Constitution could be written to properly delegate responsibilities; the House dealt with all financial matters, since matters of taxation directly affected the citizenry. And the Senate would approve Presidential appointments, since they would often be the liaison between the President and the state governments.

Hooray! Read the rest of this entry »