General Discussion

Celerity

(43,039 posts)

23. They still do have some legislative power

Tue Dec 25, 2018, 03:09 PM

Dec 2018

Here is a good synopsis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords#Legislative_functions

There are only 92 hereditary peers, you are correct, due to the House of Lords Act in 1999.

The point was about the size (not so much the actual power) of a legislative body, in case some would object that 1100, 1200 (counting the US Senate) in total was too unwieldy overall to maintain.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

California is in danger of losing a House seat after adding 2.3 million people [View all] Celerity Dec 2018 OP

Don't count on the repugs to want changes bitterross Dec 2018 #1

The next time we control both the House and the Senate, as well as Celerity Dec 2018 #3

Here's another factoid Major Nikon Dec 2018 #2

Yes, and one of the ways to gauge the size of the increase in the number of House members is called Celerity Dec 2018 #8

We also need to do away with the Senate Major Nikon Dec 2018 #10

I have no answer on how to fix the Senate (I asssume you are joking Celerity Dec 2018 #11

I'm just saying if you want to make congress truly representative, you must deep six the Senate Major Nikon Dec 2018 #13

you still need both chambers to pass laws, and the Senate doesn't change in size, so that stays the Celerity Dec 2018 #15

Actually I do have a fix for the Senate. It is ultra radical and hard to do though. Celerity Dec 2018 #14

I don't think your right about US Parliament Bucky Dec 2018 #18

UK Parliament, including House of Lords. 650 is House of Commons only Celerity Dec 2018 #21

Ah. Of course the Lords don't really work like a senate Bucky Dec 2018 #22

They still do have some legislative power Celerity Dec 2018 #23

Just to clarify.... clementine613 Dec 2018 #29

yes, so sorry to not be more clear!! I should have said 92 IN THE HOUSE Celerity Dec 2018 #30

Why cap the total, and adjust the ratio ? Could easily fix the ratio at say, 1 Rep:1,000,000 voters eppur_se_muova Dec 2018 #4

You make a great suggestion. bitterross Dec 2018 #6

Because of the smaller states... Wounded Bear Dec 2018 #7

Just ensure every state gets at least one house seat dansolo Dec 2018 #12

Well, WB, I'm not sure it has to be exact ProudLib72 Dec 2018 #28

I did say round up ... eppur_se_muova Dec 2018 #33

One per million is the opposite direction. That would reduce House size to only 330 or so. Celerity Dec 2018 #9

Agreed! ProudLib72 Dec 2018 #27

IF this happens DFW Dec 2018 #5

It's done via a mathematical formula. clementine613 Dec 2018 #16

The size of Congress Freddie Dec 2018 #17

I'm not sure about your timeline Bucky Dec 2018 #20

Alexander Hamilton: "Even 1000 Socrates would still be a mob" Bucky Dec 2018 #19

I could see moving the cap up to 400 or 450 Celerity Dec 2018 #24

Yeah, I got the numbers wrong. I mean increasing by a 100 or so Bucky Dec 2018 #34

Rhode Island is also facing the same fate, pitting our two solid Dem Reps, Totally Tunsie Dec 2018 #25

Oh wow, you are going to lose a seat?! Celerity Dec 2018 #26

It's highly likely, with Arizona benefitting from our loss. Totally Tunsie Dec 2018 #31

If we were not moving back to London, Providence is deffo Celerity Dec 2018 #32

So, lower income out of staters are undesireable, higher income only MichMan Dec 2018 #35

NY, NJ and New England should become provinces of Canada. roamer65 Dec 2018 #36