George,

In the United States system of Government there are three branches of Goverment, namely, the Legislative, Executive and Judicial. Simply stated, Congress, the Legislative Branch makes the laws; the President, the Executive Branch enforces the laws; the Supreme Court, the Judicial Branch interprets the laws and determines whether they are constitutional. These three branches are considered to be checks and balances, to assure that no part of government will become too powerful. Examples: The Congress can pass legislation that is then signed into law by the President that the Supreme Court may rule to be unconstitutional; the Congress may pass legislation that invalidates a decision made by the Supreme Court, and the President may veto legislation passed by Congress and by executive order enforce or create legislation by executive order as President Harry S. Truman did when he integrated the Armed Forces.

The focus of this discourse is on Congress and more particularly on the need for Congress to be reformed. Congress enacts legislation on the federal level that supersedes state laws. Congress is composed of 435 members. Apportionment takes place every 10 years, following the taking of the census, that determines whether a state will lose or gain one or more representatives. The total number of representatives remain 435.

The Senate is composed of 100 Senators, two Senators from each of the fifty states.The number remains constant unless another state is added to the union. It is inconceivable that there may ever be fewer states. All total there are 535 members in Congress.

This existing arrangement has weaknesses that makes for voting inequality and the denial of true democracy. This happens because the U. S. Constitution is outdated, notwithstanding the 27 Amendments that have been added to the document. The biggest fault with the Constitution is it does not permit the change that an increase in population warrants. Presently there are more than 300,000.000 people in the United states, not the 3,929.827 there were when the Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787.

Recently, two authors, both residents of Charlottesville, Virginia published books that address the matters of the Constitution and Congress.

Larry Sabato, University of Virginia professor and author of "A More Perfect Constitution" and David Swanson, a leading voice for the prosecution of former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney and author of "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union."

Sabato proposes that the House of Represenatives be composed of 1,000 (instead of the present 435) members and the Senate be expanded to 136 (instead of the present 100) members and the most populous states receive 2 additional Senators, the 15 next most populous states 1 additional Senator, and the District of Columbia (that does not now have a Senator) receive 1 Senator.

David Swanson calls for a bigger House of Representatives than presently exists and abolition of the Senate. He noted that currently each member of the House of Representatives is expected to represent 690,000 people and that the House is the same size it was in 1910, when the same 435 members were expected to represent approximately 213,000 people each. In 1860, 183 members represented about 100,000 constituents each.

Both Sabato and Swanson make interesting recommendations that deserve to be seriously considered by Americans. However, my proposal is different and more timely. I maintain that genuine reform of the Congress can take place with the House having 435 members and the Senate 100 members.

For those like Sabato and Swanson, who advocate having more Representatives in Congress it is important to understand that Congresspersons have huge staffs to assist them. Some of their staff members are paid as much as $167,000 a year. After all, delegating duties and responsibilities to others is what effective leaders do. Question: Do we need more than one President? Probably not. The President depends upon members of his team to do much of what needs to be done. Effective Congresspersons do likewise.

I recommend that the House and Senate operate by the same rules. This would prevent the Senate from wheeling power that the House cannot match. Two examples: the 60 votes to pass some measures and the filibuster rule in the Senate means that even when the House passes legislation with a bare majority the Senate may be unable to pass similar legislation with a bare majority. This gives a Senator who is more distant from his constituents more power than a member of the House. If this inequality must exist it should favor members of the House, not members of the Senate.

With the House and Senate operating by the same rules Congress will either become less effective or much more effective in getting the people's work done. I am convinced that the latter will be true. Any attempt for Congress to do less than they are doing will cause people to rise up in a way that will make what happened in last summers's Town Hall meetings look like dress rehearsasls. I believe this ineffectiveness will cause people to protest and take to the streets by hundreds of thousands. The people will demand that their representing Congressperson who is being paid a salary of $174,000 and representational allowances ranging from $1,262.065 to $1,600.539 do what he or she was elected to do. The salary for the Speaker is $223,500 and Majority Leader $193,400.

Having the same rules for the House and Senate will put the people's business ahead of partisan politics.

Uriah J. Fields (Electronic mail, October 2, 2009)

Mr Fields invites readers to visit his web site and read about his new book: www.uriahfields.com