Posts

Reflection End of Year

After looking through some of the projects on the Second Year Advocacy Forum I came away with a new sense of our ability as young people to advocate for change in various ways. I read Kara Howard’s project on voter ignorance, Grayson Stallman’s project on the need for both sides of political ideologies in the classroom, and Courtney Dunn’s project on the impact of affordable housing in urban society. Additionally, I also took a peek at various other projects on the forum which I did not comment on. This truly opened my eyes to the various topics that students are passionate about in PSL. Since our first semester was primarily focused on the legal side of things, I felt that the forum was most valuable for stimulating more diverse conversations about policy and theory.

I also liked being able to engage with second years who had similar interests. For instance, I’m very passionate about citizen engagement and participation. Finding students who advocate for similar passions was one of the best parts of the second-year advocacy forum. Especially because this made me view the second years in a new light. Kara was actually my mentor so being able to read her infographic about voter ignorance was a unique experience. Identifying mentors and connections with people who share common passions was super engaging.

Moreover, I was able to find connections between my academic studies and some of the topics I explored. For example, reading Courtney Dunn’s project was very informative because it connected to something I had been studying in one of my public policy courses. I ended up writing a final paper about public housing particularly in Cabrini Green and so reading Courtney’s differing proposals for solutions to the public housing problem was really enlightening. Being able to extend that dialogue outside of my classes, assignments, and finals was very meaningful in terms of challenging my thought processes and further engaging me in these discussions.

Lastly, this forum gave me some ideas for next year’s project. I loved seeing the diversity of thought that people displayed. Some topics were outright political, others more policy solution based, still more focused on personal development and such. Seeing the various topics that sophomores use their background and passion to explore made me really look forward to choosing a topic to explore next year, especially knowing that I’m not boxed in in terms of advocating for anything I truly feel passionate about.

Federalist Question

Since the dawn of our nation’s existence, representation has been one of the core values of the American government. The revolution itself did after all stem in large part from the complaint, “No taxation without representation!” Thus, it’s truly thought-provoking to reflect on the current apportionment of representatives in our nation. Although I don’t necessarily think the algorithm currently used to assign seats is “wrong,” it’s clear that huge population disparities exist among representatives, inherently decreasing the legitimacy of our democracy. I think instead, the true problem lies with the quota of representatives. Since the Reapportionment Act of 1929 (yes, 1929 when the American population was 121.8 million as opposed to today’s 327.2 million) the congressional body has been capped at 435 members. Due to such a rapidly growing population, this is a clue that already the representation of citizens is compromised. In my eyes, no matter how you divide that 435, it’s impossible for majority interests to be accurately represented by the same small number of representatives. According to Time, a hypothetical 930 seat house would significantly decrease the disparity among states even while maintaining the current algorithm to apportion them. In this case, all states would actually have at least 2 representatives, and they’re all much closer to the target representation of citizens. Not only would this numerically and statistically better the representativeness of congress, but it would also open doors for more varied political representation. With smaller populations being more fairly represented, these populations would likely be able to more easily elect representatives that accurately reflect their own demographic. Additionally, more seats in Congress would bring an influx in numbers that could help in hearing new ideas, cross-the-aisle voting, and more. Additionally, I think that the District of Columbia should be included in the reapportionment of representatives. Having a voting representative would be helpful not only to actually represent the district’s opinion in legislation through a vote but also to defend against a potential problem that I see in the current system. Congress is currently allowed “exclusive jurisdiction over the district in all cases whatsoever.” Without the autonomy that having at least a voting representative in congress symbolizes, it’s easy to see how the District could potentially be used as a political pawn. Additionally the District pays the second-highest per capita income tax in the nation but have no voting voice in Congress as to how the budget should use their tax dollars. Especially due to truly being at the heart of US policy, I think that it’s more logical for the District to set the tone for accurate representation in our nation. If congress can’t execute on the promise of no taxation without representation in its own backyard, where can it?  It’s my opinion that the unincorporated territories, which neither pay taxes to the US government nor follow all provisions of the constitution, and have their own government and laws should maintain representation in congress, but not as voting members. The current representation allows the territories to have a voice in legislative matters and speak on influential policy but does not give them voting rights. I think that this is fair considering the autonomy under which they operate.

 

References

Wilson, Chris. “How to Fix the House: Add About 500 Seats.” Time, Time, 15 Oct. 2018, time.com/5423623/house-representatives-number-seats/.