Shall Not Exceed Notice
Dear State Representative ___________________,
I have informed you of the following problem in the past. If not, consider this to be your first and final notice. Our new congressional district maps are going to be published soon. These maps MUST reflect the requirements set forth in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, wherein; "The number of Representatives SHALL NOT EXCEED one for every thirty Thousand,.." (1/30,000). The problem is that "exceed" is being interpreted as "no more than". This flies in the face of the very definition of "exceed" AND the original intent as written in Federalist #56, wherein; "Allowing to this case the weight which is due to it, and comparing it with the House of Representatives as above explained, it seems to give the fullest assurance that A REPRESENTATIVE FOR EVERY THIRTY THOUSAND INHABITANTS will render the latter both a safe and competent guardian of the interests which will be confided to it."
In addition, it must be taken into consideration, that which the Founding Fathers were protecting against, in drafting this restriction. It was intended that this ratio of 1/30,000 be adhered to "as near as is practicable". It was also intended that this rational number, 1/30,000 should not vary UP OR DOWN! Why? If you extrapolate to the extreme in EITHER DIRECTION you will see why.
Here's a graph that will illustrate this comparison;
1/infinity <----------------------------- 1/30,000 ------------------------------->1/1
(Pure Dictatorship) (Representative Republic) (Democracy)
If one exceeds that number in one direction one gets a ratio of 1/1. This translates as one Representative in the House for every inhabitant, that being HIM or HERSELF! This a COMPLETELY UNDESIRABLE form of government. This is a PURE DEMOCRACY. This was obviously not the intent of the founding, as we are guaranteed "a Republican form of Government." in Article IV, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution.
If one exceeds the ratio of 1/30,000 in the other direction, one gets 1/infinity. This translates to one Representative for EVERYONE. This is a PURE DICTATORSHIP, as can be seen in countries like North Korea, where one guy, (Kim Jong-Un), speaks for the entire country. This is also a COMPLETELY UNDESIRABLE form of government. This too, was and is to be avoided at all cost.
So, since they were not only trying to create a Republic, but also trying to avoid a pure Democracy AND/OR a pure Dictatorship, it was decided that A FIXED RATIO (1/30,000), would be set in stone in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3. That ratio was set at "a Representative for every thirty thousand inhabitants", as explained in Federalist #56.
Therefore, it is now obvious to any reasonable individual, that "shall not exceed" is to be STRICTLY INTERPRETED as "SHALL NOT MOVE IN EITHER DIRECTION". There is no ambiguity in this requirement.
If you claim to be in compliance with your Oath of Office, it is now required of you to follow the restrictions of Article I, Section 2, Clause 3. This means that with a population of ________________ people, the State of ________________ would now qualify for _______ seats in the House of Representatives. With the official data indicating apportionment of only ______ seats, there would now be a deficit of ______ vacant seats in the ________________ Congressional House.
Therefore, the State legislature is immediately required to "issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies." Your response IS REQUIRED. Compliance with these requirements is not optional or subject to the unconstitutional Reapportionment Act of 1929. The requirement to fill these vacancies is subject only to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 and Article I, Section 2, Clause 4, of the Constitution for the united States of America.
Sincerely, Your Constituent,