Legislature Downsizing
10 Responses to “Legislature Downsizing”
Got something to say? Drop it here.
WNYM seeks to provide a forum for snarky opinions and open discussion. However, we do need to have some ground rules around this joint. In order to make our comments useful and interesting, the following guidelines have been established for comment users. In short; don't act like a libelous or hate-filled tool and we'll get along just fine.
Bruce Says:July 19th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Well you could start out with retroactive term limits, there goes Marinelli, Mazur and Ranzenhofer.
Then a minimum IQ of 50, and there goes Dan Kozub and Betty Jean Grant.
Then a 5′0 height requirement to serve and there goes John Mills.
And your down to 9.
laughingoutloud Says:July 19th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Why cut the number? More is good for checks checks and balances. Cut the salaries so that prospective candidates understand that it is not a full time job. Their role should be that of citizen legislators.
Prodigal Son Says:July 19th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
I have to admit, I think reducing the size of the legislatures is a red-herring. We need fewer governments, and fewer layers of governments. But making a certain layer of government less representative doesn’t necessarily help.
Abolish all the villages. Merge all of the first ring suburbs into the city of Buffalo. But cut the size of legislatures, and save $500K in salaries? I don’t get it.
al-alo Says:July 19th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
here we go again.
i dont really understand how people confuse eliminating public officials with reform. alas.
15 is really not a huge number for a county our size. my home county of orange (ny) has 21 with a population 376k.* We have 15 and 921k.
so how are we grossly overrepresented?
*http://www.co.orange.ny.us/orgMain.asp?orgid=3&storyTypeID=&sid
Timothy Domst Says:July 19th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
For one, they are setting an example to those villages that should be merged into the towns or city, so they don’t look like hypocrites. The red herring is claiming that the county will only save the salary of the legislators. They have offices and staffs and benefits that will be eliminated too.
lefty Says:July 19th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Bruce,
I hope you were just making a joke.
If they adjust the seats, it should be based on population. The CoB is represented by parts of 6 seats yet has less then 1/3 of the population. The city provides even less than 1/3 in taxes.
Give the city 3 seats and spread the rest around the county on a pin wheel according to population.
James Says:July 19th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
I agree that fewer reps might not be the answer. Reducing the number puts even more power in the hands of those remaining. Perhaps we can cut two reps and lower the salaries.
Greg Says:July 20th, 2008 at 12:44 am
Keep the hot brunette next to marinelli
Adam K Says:July 20th, 2008 at 1:57 am
Lefty
You think that’s bad, you should check out Cheektowaga - represented by 5 different legislators - 1/3 - and has less than 1/12th of the population.
BP
that should be which 6 should go.
My sense is that if you redistricted fairly, you’ld be left with something like Iannello, Rath, Ranzenhofer, Mills, Miller Williams, Kennedy, Whyte, Wroblewski, and Mazur. Why do the reps support it? because they KNOW they’d be guaranteed 1/3 of the seats in a fair plan - as opposed to the 1/5 in the plan now (which, ironically, they drew!)
Dan Meyer Says:July 24th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Village dissolution?
Let the people decide:
http://www.thesunnews.net/editorial.php3