On The Under-Represented American Citizen

Tyler Durden's picture

Having just undergone the Presidential election and the democratic right of every citizen to vote and have their voice heard, we thought it interesting that of the world's major nations, the US citizen is in fact the second worst represented when it comes to government. The Chinese citizen, empirically at least, has a fractionally greater weight in their politician's actions. Only in India does each politician represent more of the nation's citizens. How long before we hear the chants of "Over-Taxed And Under-Represented"?



Chart: Goldman Sachs

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Vashta Nerada's picture

No representation without taxation!

YesWeKahn's picture

At least, US beats China for a thing.

Spastica Rex's picture

We have more people in prison.

I'm sure there are others.

Flakmeister's picture

Probably more guns per capita as well....

ZerOhead's picture

Number of people a US 'Parliamentarian' represents...


(Which also just happens to coincide with the number of US billionaires...)

AlaricBalth's picture

I believe it is 600,000. The US Rep in my congressional district "represents" a population of 710,000. She clearly does not represent me however. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz only represents the interests of whatever the President's people tell her. A puppet in the truest sense.

ZerOhead's picture

Good point... I'm just a touch high on the billionaire count as well (400+).

Even with 600,000 citizens per elected member they do not represent you but their financial and organizational sponsors.

SafelyGraze's picture

OT eponym of the day: carny

A "carny" is anyone who runs a "joint" (booth), "grab joint" (food stand), game, or ride at a carnival, boardwalk or amusement park.

The word carny is thought to have become popularized around 1931 in North America, when it was first colloquially used to describe "one who works at a carnival.

The carny vocabulary is traditionally part of carnival cant, a secret language, and is an ever-changing form of communication, in large part designed to be impossible to understand by an outsider. Thus, as words are assimilated into the culture at large, they lose their function and are replaced by other more obscure or insular terms



AldousHuxley's picture

government loves population increases even with illegals.


100 senators for population pyramid scheme means politicians increase in relative power and status

The Alarmist's picture

So what do you want?  Another 1000 Congress Critters?

SafelyGraze's picture

mark carney lingo


example: "Gamma refers to the rate of change in an option’s delta relative to the price of the underlying asset. "

Flakmeister's picture

Umm...  the greeks ain't that difficult a concept...

Louie the Dog's picture

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is why we have the word 'cunt'.

prains's picture

Actually the parlaimentarians only represent Goldman Sachs and Sons so this chart is entirely WRONG

icanhasbailout's picture

If you want pull in politics step 1 is to become a convention delegate. Then your vote is one of a few thousand instead of one of millions.

SafelyGraze's picture

or if your sovereign state leaves the union

icanhasbailout's picture

If you truly want to be better represented rather than just complain about it, the choice is in your hands. As a convention delegate my opinion has been solicited by every single statewide candidate for office as well as federal House and Senate candidates.

ACP's picture

Not sure of I agree with the intent of the article. I sure as shit don't want MORE dickhead politicians.

dynomutt's picture



The locking of # of representatives to 435 in the early 1800's is one of the major reasons why we're in this sorry state now.


It will take a reboot to fix things, but politicians that:

1. Do not accept money from anyone related to their service

2. Receive a modest annual stipend and no other benefits, something along the lines of $10000 2012-USD per year

3. Receive no special favors

4. Do not accept any foreign titles (INCLUDING ESQ)

5. Represent no more than 100000 persons

6. Does not serve more than one term per 20 years

would provide for a much more fair and balanced republic than the present corporate inverted fascist state the US is now.


Yes, morality is a major issue, but amorality and ambivalence take a long time for any interested interloper to gestate in the populace.  A reboot is the only way that any of this would be possible.

dynomutt's picture

Also, representation should be considered to be a "proxy vote" of the populace.

In which case, if representative #1 has 99,602 constituents and representative #2 has 87,308 constituents, the vote of representative #1 would be weighted 99602 and representative #2 would be weighted 87308 so there is no power dilution simply due to differences in district size.  This may also have a positive impact in busting political parties.

Flakmeister's picture

The Repubs would never go for that...

They would be in the wildnerness now if not for the gerrrymandering based on the 2010 census....

Vashta Nerada's picture

At a minimum, there should be no pension plan for congressional members.  The job was never intended to be a career.  From that mistake grew the idea that congress is exempt from congresses' laws, which harkens back to Caesar, for Pete's sake!

ACP's picture

Good point. The job was initially a volunteer, unpaid position. If a Constitutional amendment was passed to limit the pay of each member of Congress to the average per capita income in the US, that would make more representation worth it, for sure.

Edit: That would encourage more people who actually have real jobs/businesses to run, people who are more in touch with the struggles of the middle class. The suggestions above are good also.

Edit 2: Dammit, didn't think of this earlier......if the power of the Federal govt were decreased significantly, that would also decrease the need for Federal representation. Several ways to go about this.

Colonel Walter E Kurtz's picture

Exactly right mutt.

The more reps we have in the house the less influence the the lobbyists would have. If lobbyists had say 5000 reps they had to try to rangle up, it would add to greatly to the cost of buying votes. We also would have more reps voting independently and doing what is correct for their constituents rather than voting in the manner that allows their own party help them get reelected. The less amount people a representative is beholden too to be reelected, the better off we all would be.  

A Nanny Moose's picture

COTUS ArticleI Section 2: The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative;

psychobilly's picture

Those with wealth and power will always find a "legal" way of buying political influence.  Getting around the above restrictions would be child's play.  Just more Government War on X type thinking that makes totally unrealistic assumptions about human nature.  

Government offices need to be reduced in number, power and scope to the degree that they aren't worth buying in the first place.

I don't need a "representative."  And have no violent desires to control others through one.  Thanks anyway.

formadesika3's picture

Felons can't vote. Solution is to incarcerate more people. /sarc

AlaricBalth's picture

Will there be voting booths in FEMA camps?

icanhasbailout's picture

yes they will have a function similar to the call-in numbers on American Idol

Lost Wages's picture

The US imprisons more people, but I think China executes more people.

Alasdair's picture

Texas and Florida doing their best China impersonations

formadesika3's picture

Where would they put 'em if US did have more representatives? Capitol bldg can only hold so many. Oh, that's right, place is empty anyway most of the time, they're all out seeking re-election 24/7.

edit: oops, Catullus said it below already, said it better.

Critical Path's picture

Its worked out well for Greece

A Lunatic's picture

Yes, but who really wants MOAR politicians??

PGR88's picture


I can not imagine Congress getting LESS dysfunctional with twice as many representatives, can you?

August's picture

The secret is... smaller countries.

ZerOhead's picture

There was some talk in Texas not-so-long ago along those lines...

E unum pluribus bitchez!

dynomutt's picture

There is wisdom to that.

NeedtoSecede's picture

Credit Mike Church: "If at first you don't secede, try, try, again!"

Secession Bitchez! 

Being Free's picture

The secret is smaller fucking government.

Jliax's picture

What about small government which implies few politicians which implies a high politician/nr-of-voters ratio ?

But then again, a small government would also imply low costs and small budget deficits.....

Vashta Nerada's picture

I wish.  If we closed down the federal departments which are not authorized by the constitution, we would have a surplus, not a $1.5 trillion deficit, even at today's tax revenue numbers.

Jliax's picture

I will donate to anyone who takes these issues to the supreme court even though I am not a US citizen.

Vashta Nerada's picture

Wishful so far.  I'm still dreaming of the day that no more dollars can be borrowed or manufactured, at which point my dream will come true.

Flakmeister's picture

John Lennon wrote a song for you...

Google "Imagine"....

Alasdair's picture

Fewer politicians would mean easier to buy.  Easier to control.

Simply shrinking government would help centralize power.  I think decentralization would help dissipate undue power.

JustObserving's picture

We have not had a representative government in the US for decades.  Max Keiser says the US is a kakistocracy, rule by the worst.

That is why we have the Patriot Act, NDAA, wars all over the world, war on terror, torture,  unlimited QE, bank bailouts in 2008, no bankster prosecutions, extra-judicial drone killings,  and now 30,000 drones to spy over Americans.

Since when have we had representative government?