Why Do We Even Have Congressional Districts?
Original post made by jrm on Aug 24, 2010
on Aug 24, 2010 at 10:27 pm
Check your US Constitution - there is NO REQUIREMENT for a member of congress to live in the district s/he represents. It would be nice if it was, but it ain't.
Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for representatives. Each representative must: (1) be at least twenty-five years old; (2) have been a citizen of the United States for the past seven years; and (3) be (at the time of the election) an INHABITANT OF THE STATE they represent. Members need not live in their districts.
on Aug 25, 2010 at 8:11 am
jrm is a registered user.
A-Ron....I am fully aware of the legality of such a candidacy, it has been done a number of times recently on both sides of the aisle, that is not the point I am making, for me personally I think it is not right and is a sticking point with me. I can just imagine the initial situation that prompted the law to be changed to allow this. Do you really think at the end of the day this is a good policy?
on Aug 25, 2010 at 10:10 am
I guess I'm not sure what law you are referring to when you say "the law [was] changed to allow this." With regard to the qualifications for representatives, the Constitution has NEVER been changed.
However, it was changed in 1916 to allow for the direct election of SENATORS by the people of each state. Before that the senators were selected by the state legislature.
I agree that a congress-critter should be a resident of the district. That way we could get rid of Garamendi.