what are we fighting for?

we are in Iraq trying to set up a democratic situation there. some of the people there like this and some hate our guts for imposing our will. the congress of the us did not declare war. they haven't since 1941. the size of the house of representatives is set at 435 members per a 1911 fed statute. this tailored the size of the body to the dimensions of the capitol building. the constitution says a rep will sit for NO FEWER THAN 30,000 people. this is important. it displays their opinion about the workings of democracy. Plato, a writer they were familiar with; whose shoulders they would readily admit they stood upon; stated that democracy worked only in small groups. the apathy shown by voters in our elections indicates two things. people are so busy and dependent on their wages they are willing to sacrifice their franchise. Also and just as important in national elections is the representation has diminished because the legislative bodies refuse to grow. the result of this policy is these elections are very manageable and predictable and a single vote seems not to matter. local issues in which numbers are crucial gain voter participation. it would take courage to face this possibility and advocate any change. the status quo involves a real opportunity risk of shoving away the responsiveness people feel they want from their government; that we were taught in elementary school was our heritage. but in these past decades with the assassinations, Watergate. budget deficits. exponential debt. undeclared and futile wars. it seems it is impossible to reclaim the quality of democratic solution to our problems. i believe if the number in the house was raised to the level the constitution called for the power would be restored to congress and representational democracy would experience a resurrection. finance reform would be meaningless if the very nature of the odds in any election were beyond buying off.