Lesson 2 Assignment 1

Student Responses:

“Article I, Section 2, clause 1.

The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.

This clause of the constitution begins by limiting the term of the representative to 2 yrs between reelection. The limited term in office lowers the possibility of tyranny because the representatives would shortly face the people for their actions. However the term is longer than a year to permit for training and experience.

One of the most important parts of the clause is that these representatives are elected by the people. The representative is voted in to represent the interests of the majority of the people for whom he represents.

The last part of this clause demonstrates that the definition of who can be an elector is left to the states. Those able to vote for the state legislature are then able to vote for their national representative.

This clause of the constitution is completely in line with the theme of the constitution; a government of the people by the people and for the people. This clause clearly shows that the founders valued the people rights and valued each states agency. Unfortunately in later years the states didn’t value the opinions of the people enough to maintain their rights to determine who gets to vote therefore the 13th,15th, 19th, and 26th amendments were added to the constitution.”

         —Adam Alder

“Article I. Section 2. Clause 1.
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.The Framers of the Constitution designed a legislative branch called a Congress of the United States. It was a bicameral, two house, branch which would have ALL legislative power. The House of Representatives would represent the interests of the people, and the other house, the Senate, would represent the interests of the States. Article I. Sec.1.Clause 1.

The Members of the House Representatives are elected within each state by the people of that state to represent them in the national Congress. They serve for two year terms. The Founders intelligently designed a great system because the people have representation at the national seat of government in a peoples’ assembly; by representatives of their own choosing. The people in each state are the electors who choose (vote for) their national representatives. The same people (electors) in each state who are qualified to vote for their Representatives in their State Legislature, are qualified to vote for their national Representatives. These representatives, only serve for a two year terms so that they will be held accountable to the people and have to report to them often for approval of what they are doing, in order to be reelected. It is also a great system because the national government is leaving it up to the individual States to decide who is qualified to be an elector (to vote). Whomever is qualified to vote for a state representative is automatically qualified to vote for their national representative. The national government does not need to micro manage everything; states still have some sovereignty.”

         —Carolyn Alder

“The House of Representatives represents one of the two houses of Congress and was specifically designed to represent the interests of the people. As such, this particular clause in the Constitution indicates that members of the House of Representatives are to be chosen “by the people of the several states.” This suggests that they both represent and are accountable to those who elect them – the people. But, specifically, they represent and are accountable to the people of the state from which they are elected. Considering the many states in our nation, and the various differences in their specific and regional interests, it would seem that only those bills which address and satisfy the common interests of the majority of ALL the people of the United States should be able to pass muster in this house of Congress. That, I believe, was the intent of the Founders.

However, the fact that they are to be subject to the election process every two years suggests to me that the Founders understood both the human nature behind both the electors and their chosen representatives, as well as the responsibility for each. Members of the House who do not adequately represent the interests of the people have an opportunity to feel the disappointment of the people fairly quickly in their elections (every two years). In addition, public opinion can move and change quite often because it tends to be infused with short-term realities and expectations. In short, the House of Representatives should represent the energy of the people, but should, of necessity, curb and direct that energy by short-term representation by each individual member of the House so that new ideas do not overwhelm responsibility in government.

Finally, the Founders trusted that those people who qualified as electors on the state level were sufficiently qualified as electors for representation in the House on the federal level. In other words, those people who are engaged in choosing government representation at the local level are best suited to judge the merits of representation at the federal level through the election process.

In summary, the Founders chose a three-faceted approach to proper representation of the interests of the people: 1) create a House that is composed of representatives elected directly by the people, 2) keep their terms of representation short so that public opinion can be heard often, and 3) trust the qualifications for suffrage at the state or local level.”

         —Eric Colby

“Article1 Sections 2 and 3 clarify the distinctive character of each of the divisions (House of Representatives and Senate) of Congress which should be the sole legislative branch of the government because it answers to the people.
Members of the House were to be elected by the People, who, as electors (voters) needed to pass certain qualifications set by the state. Members of the Senate however were to be elected by their respective state legislatures; again, the Constitution sets out minimum requirements for those who can be seated as Senators.
There was a reason for this distinction of electors: the House of Representatives looked after the laws that would affect the people and therefore the Representatives themselves were directly responsible to the people. The Senate was to look after financial matters which directly impacted the States and was therefore to be responsible to the States.
This entire system was part of the delicate checks and balances of a Republic which we have not kept. By Amendment XVII, we removed the election of Senators from the state legislatures (the local governmental point of interest in what Senators did) and placed the vote directly into the hands of the people, so that the distinction of purposes between the houses became blurred.
We have since blurred all lines. Through regulations, government agencies (the executive branch) like the IRS actually legislate, and the judiciary legislates at will rather than interprets the laws of the land. Hence, the judiciary has become a political arm of the reigning president for the accomplishment of his/her programs. The system of checks and balances is being eroded completely.
The defining of the character of each house of Congress and the system of checks and balances was great as conceived. With our country’s urbanization, I would prefer seeing Representatives elected for a 4 year period rather than two years in order to give them a better chance to grow into their work and exhibit the truth of their promises. Elections are costly, and the two-year terms probably prohibit many good people from running.
But, be that as it may, it is the erosion of all balances and the party polarization that has replaced balance that appalls me. What was excellent really is no more.”

         —Mary Hokanson

The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature.
We have to first realize that the Constitution has built in term limits. We as American citizens need to do nothing more than enforce the built in term limits using the words that have been written into the Constitution. In the statement “members chosen every second year” is a term limit of two years. It was up to the people to enforce this term limit if needed. One that we as Americans have not been taught nor have we enforced. This elected Representative was to be held accountable to the people who have elected him in their state. We also have to look at the idea that the House of Representatives is only one of two branches of Congress. This is the branch elected for the people, by the people. The members elected into this office also carry the most power as elected Statesmen, therefore the two year term limit. This was to help stop the corruption of power by one Representative.
In the second part of the sentence it was entrusted to those people that where qualified as electors on the state level, that they are also sufficiently qualified as electors for representation in the House on the National level. Our forefathers believed that if the people that elected state level House Representatives were involved enough to qualify and elect State Representatives they would be diligent enough to elect the National level House Representatives.

         —James Williams

The members of the House of Representatives are to be chosen directly by the people they represent every two years. This allows for the people to make changes on a very regular basis if necessary, but does provide for some stability (as long as everyone plays by the rules set up in the constitution).

The electors of the respective state only need to meet the requirements of the largest political body in the state to serve as an elector.

In other countries a vote is cast for a party which will then get a percentage of seats in their respective legislative body roughly commensurate with the number of votes won in the election. This makes it very hard to hold anyone accountable and the body politic even more partisan than what we see here in our country.

While, as a country, we have devolved from every representative being accountable for each vote, in that parties tend to vote in blocks. We still aren’t as bad off as other countries where the political discourse can be laborious that nothing get done. What would help in our situation is if, we could somehow eliminate the party structure that has been set up over time.

This would help to create an atmosphere where debate is required, as well as compromise, but at least we wouldn’t have a subset of a political party pushing the agenda, to far in any direction.

         —Blake Tuddenham