Well like the story says we are not really the ones doing the choosing.

The biggest advantage offered those in the House
of Representatives is a process known as Gerrymandering where
Congressional Districts are loaded with friendly voters from
Representative’s own party. In effect, Members of Congress—working
through their state legislature--get to choose their voters rather than
letting voters choose their Congressman.

Therein lies the problem. I found the rest of the article quite interesting.


When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that
there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representatives every
election cycle. That was the experience...

Well like the story says we are not really the ones doing the choosing.

The biggest advantage offered those in the House
of Representatives is a process known as Gerrymandering where
Congressional Districts are loaded with friendly voters from
Representative’s own party. In effect, Members of Congress—working
through their state legislature--get to choose their voters rather than
letting voters choose their Congressman.

Therein lies the problem. I found the rest of the article quite interesting.


When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that
there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representatives every
election cycle. That was the experience they witnessed in state
legislatures at the time (and most of the state legislatures offered
just one-year terms). For well over 100 years after the Constitution
was adopted, the turnover averaged in the 50% range as expected.
In the twentieth century, turnover began to decline. As
power and prestige flowed to Washington during the New Deal era, fewer
and fewer Members of Congress wanted to leave. In 1968, Congressional
turnover fell to single digits for the first time ever and it has
remained very low ever since.
I wonder for whom the new deal was really written?