>I suspect the country does better when the government isn't passing all sorts of new laws. You're entitled to that opinion. You're not entitled to rewrite th

>I suspect the country does better when the government isn't passing all sorts of new laws. You're entitled to that opinion. You're not entitled to rewrite the rules to enforce it on everyone -- that's supposed to require a Constitutional amendment. >When one party controls Congress and the other controls the Executive tends to be good for the country. Right now we have one party controlling the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, despite the fact that they got strictly fewer votes for both the Senate and the Presidency. In fact, they only control the House because it hasn't been readjusted for population size since 1910: actually restoring the original ratios of voters to Representatives would create hundreds of new seats in the more urbanized states. This is undemocratic, and no amount of whining about the procedural finery of the American regional-federal system changes that. The majority of Americans are disenfranchised by our existing system, which no longer operates according to anything like nonpartisan rules, but instead operates to ensure perpetual Republican government.