Look right through me.
Jun. 30th, 2004 11:15 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
raybearI've been feeling really "drifty" since I returned. Like I can't figure out if I was really gone for two weeks and if my time in Los Angeles was real, and it's probably extra confusing that I'm not returning to my old routine of a dayjob (even though I wouldn't want to go back there to save my life....okay, maybe if it was truly life-dependent I would.....). All the parts of my life seem to be floating, jumbled in a cloud, and one by one they are falling down to the ground and becoming real, but I can't control what falls when and where. But last night I went to a memorial service and it was ridiculous and touching and cliche and sad (as most all of these things are) and during and afterwards I felt myself slowly coming back into my body. I'm still trying to get my bearings, but I feel myself moving towards stability. I mean, not that my life is particularly stable right now, but I can be stable in the midst of it.
I know this is a bit late, but I'm still obsessed with this essay from Harper's May issue by called "The Case for Abolishing the United States Senate".
WHAT DEMOCRACY? THE CASE FOR ABOLISHING THE UNITED STATES SENATE
Rosenfeld, Richard N.
Harper's Magazine (Vol. 308, No. 1848, May 2004, pp. 35-44)
The author argues that the U.S. Senate is a vestige of eighteenth-century colonial America, a product of the Founding Fathers' distrust of the "tyranny of the majority". Rosenfeld believes that a deliberative body of Congress that was originally intended to provide even representation for all states, regardless of size, now disproportionately favors the least-populous states. The U.S. senators from the twenty-six smallest states, representing only 18 percent of the population, hold a majority in the Senate, and "nothing becomes law if those senators object." He notes that the House of Lords, the British equivalent of the U.S. Senate, can no longer veto acts of the House of Commons. The representational imbalance also takes the form of financial benefits -- more federal funds per capita flow to the less-populous states than to larger states with major metropolitan areas. U.S. senators are also disproportionately wealthy, a result of the large amounts of funds needed to reach voters during elections in states with populations of 10-30 million. The author traces the debate over the Senate among the members of the Constitutional Convention of 1787.
Speaking of pretentious magazines, while at school, I joined an online conference with my fellow writer students to discuss The New Yorker. And now I'm trying to brainstorm all of this into a pitch for a column for a online magazine.
While I enjoy writing and reading in my boxers, I think it's time to shower and get dressed so I'll feel like a more productive citizen. I keep avoiding the task of organizing and filing my papers and desk, but at least my tools of procrastination are things like completing a writing exercise, sending a query, and reading my first book for school. Right now, I'm all about novellas. Reading them and writing them. I'm bringing them back. Wait, were they ever popular? Hmm, perhaps that should be topic of my 5 page critical paper: Novellas: They're Back, and They're on Pogs!
I know this is a bit late, but I'm still obsessed with this essay from Harper's May issue by called "The Case for Abolishing the United States Senate".
WHAT DEMOCRACY? THE CASE FOR ABOLISHING THE UNITED STATES SENATE
Rosenfeld, Richard N.
Harper's Magazine (Vol. 308, No. 1848, May 2004, pp. 35-44)
The author argues that the U.S. Senate is a vestige of eighteenth-century colonial America, a product of the Founding Fathers' distrust of the "tyranny of the majority". Rosenfeld believes that a deliberative body of Congress that was originally intended to provide even representation for all states, regardless of size, now disproportionately favors the least-populous states. The U.S. senators from the twenty-six smallest states, representing only 18 percent of the population, hold a majority in the Senate, and "nothing becomes law if those senators object." He notes that the House of Lords, the British equivalent of the U.S. Senate, can no longer veto acts of the House of Commons. The representational imbalance also takes the form of financial benefits -- more federal funds per capita flow to the less-populous states than to larger states with major metropolitan areas. U.S. senators are also disproportionately wealthy, a result of the large amounts of funds needed to reach voters during elections in states with populations of 10-30 million. The author traces the debate over the Senate among the members of the Constitutional Convention of 1787.
Speaking of pretentious magazines, while at school, I joined an online conference with my fellow writer students to discuss The New Yorker. And now I'm trying to brainstorm all of this into a pitch for a column for a online magazine.
While I enjoy writing and reading in my boxers, I think it's time to shower and get dressed so I'll feel like a more productive citizen. I keep avoiding the task of organizing and filing my papers and desk, but at least my tools of procrastination are things like completing a writing exercise, sending a query, and reading my first book for school. Right now, I'm all about novellas. Reading them and writing them. I'm bringing them back. Wait, were they ever popular? Hmm, perhaps that should be topic of my 5 page critical paper: Novellas: They're Back, and They're on Pogs!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-06-30 10:08 am (UTC)