# data[].attributes.body
I like what Mrs. Ammons said, but I don't necessarily agree. It is a possibility that, by allowing minorities into programs, they can improve and change stereotypes and society. However, by allowing just anyone into programs, it can lower the standard of education and cause lower GPAs and test scores. I could see this go both ways. Hopefully it goes the way of the first scenario, but that won't always be the case.

# data[].attributes.body
let's go diversity!

# data[].attributes.body
The importance for Congress is that they're Powerful. The Congress are more powerful than the other branches. They can make laws and can do so with or without the president's consent.

# data[].attributes.body
We could take a page from Norway and let any adult run in any public election. Mainly for the ability to incorporate younger generations into choice making

# data[].attributes.body
The first term that I put on my list was "representative". I want my congress to represent me as a member of society, not just another citizen.

# data[].attributes.body
If youre sitting listening to someone talk for hours on end and you get tired, your thoughts wont be as sharp and clear as if you were in a meeting for an hour or so. Filibusters aren't necessarily going to have an accurate reading.

# data[].attributes.body
I never thought of filibustering that way. I think that yes, filibustering does produce some progress and can change opinions, but it also is not the most ethical or educated way to solve problems.

# data[].attributes.headline
I think filibusters are immature, getting a law passed by not letting people go to the bathroom.... really?

# data[].attributes.subject
I think filibusters are immature, getting a law passed by not letting people go to the bathroom.... really?

# data[].attributes.headline
majority of congressmen come from being lawyers and are very educated. they put a lot of effort to get where they are

# data[].attributes.subject
majority of congressmen come from being lawyers and are very educated. they put a lot of effort to get where they are

# data[].attributes.body
In the book it says that congressman makes 4 times the salary of a typical American family but they do put in alot of work and I think they deserve their salary.

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree that congressmen get paid too much. they have to deal with all the issues that are brought up in government and are the ones to weed through the best solutions.

# data[].attributes.headline
I don't think congressmen get paid to much because they do work and being a congressmen is not an easy task

# data[].attributes.subject
I don't think congressmen get paid to much because they do work and being a congressmen is not an easy task

# data[].attributes.body
If you imagine the creation of good and concise laws as a SANDWICH, Wouldn't you prefer quality over quantity!!! take time to perfect the ingredients in the law so their can be no argument that its perfect.

# data[].attributes.body
Going based off of Hunter's comment/question, I think that candidates should be chosen based off of merit and skills, not diversity. People with higher education often do know about issues that need to be solved in America, not because they've experienced them but because they have done research and observed these situations. I say that the best candidate should win, not the most diverse.

# data[].attributes.body
There is honestly no way you could represent everyone in the United States with just the people we have in office.

# data[].attributes.body
I don't think there's a way to represent all the people 100% fairly all the time no matter what kind of restrictions or tests there are. People will always disagree especially in a leadership role like congress.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Andy. Having a bunch of old men representing our country is not a good idea. There is no voice for the younger generation. Old people tend to stick with old traditions.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that diversity can be a good thing, as long as we can categorize that diversity. With so many different views of things, people should compromise, come together, and support one cause instead of fight for two similar causes. It's impossible to have every race, religion, cause, etc. represented in the government without having every American in government.

# data[].attributes.body
diversity is a good thing though because it makes it so that more groups are represented and have their say in government

# data[].attributes.body
If there are more people in the seats it would be harder for people to agree on things and nothing would get done.

# data[].attributes.body
The issue of having more people within Congress, is it's going to add another year of voting. Therefore, this is more likely to turn more people off from voting even more.

# data[].attributes.body
The Congress are more powerful than the other branches. They can make laws and can do so with or without the president's consent. Congress can remove a president or a Supreme Court justice.

# data[].attributes.body
Humans are creatures of habit, they like voting for people from whom they can expect a constant (albeit boring and possibly non productive) result

# data[].attributes.headline
i dont think more is always better, we need to improve what we have

# data[].attributes.subject
i dont think more is always better, we need to improve what we have

# data[].attributes.body
I somewhat agree with Isaiah's comment. I get where he's coming from. If every member of congress was treated equally and with equal power, nothing would really get done. With unbalanced powers, one party is in charge, and power is given to the stronger party.

# data[].attributes.body
Powerful is a great thing but if congress is too powerful, then checks and balances would start to crumble

# data[].attributes.body
I think because people who are already in power don't want to lose power, our human morals are lost in the realm of giving challengers an equal chance because those who are already in office don't want to lose their position and therefore no one in legislation, executive, or judicial branch will check the legislative branch when they don't make changes for equality.

# data[].attributes.body
They are well known for the things that they have done like passing the right bills and get people to like them. The challengers have nothing to start out and most likely have less money than incumbents to become well known.

# data[].attributes.body
people who are challenging an incumbent position should present different ideas and be willing to invest more time and money into their campaign.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Andy on the fact that they should enact an amendment so that Incumbents cant create those such laws but that simply wouldn't happen because the congressmen benefit from it so why would they enact something like that.

# data[].attributes.headline
if the public was better informed about the incumbents they might not be as well liked

# data[].attributes.subject
if the public was better informed about the incumbents they might not be as well liked

# data[].attributes.body
They could have new ideas and also improve upon. That's what Andy said and I agree with that.

# data[].attributes.body
Similar to the candidate and Bill McKay, even though the incumbent has the advantage, the better candidate can win. Although, if Incumbents weren't provided the extra advantages such as franking privileges or extra funding, then challengers would be given an equal chance.

# data[].attributes.body
The incumbent and the challenger need to stand on equal ground, with all the benefits that incumbents receive it makes it hard, if not impossible, for the challenger to win. One way that this could be changed, with us as a people entering more of a media and internet usage era, would be to give both the incumbent and the challenger equal media coverage regardless of what extra money the incumbent would spend over the challenger.

# data[].attributes.body
One thing that could be done in order to make not incumbents to have a better chance is to get rid of the extra funding that incumbents get

# data[].attributes.body
I think that new challengers can have a chance at gaining office is by removing certain incumbency advantages, such as the franking privilege, so that they have to truly fundraise to send flyers to every home. I think that the candidates for the position could also have debates and prove that they are the better candidate.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that new incumbents could get reelected by having more important ideas to obtain, and obviously having term limits, therefore they can't be reelected over and over again, giving new people an option to go into office, therefore bringing in new ideas.

# data[].attributes.headline
we could put a term limit, so they dont constantly get reelected

# data[].attributes.subject
we could put a term limit, so they dont constantly get reelected

# data[].attributes.body
We could remove some government granted privileges like franking

# data[].attributes.body
Incumbency-Filibustering in my opinion while may not allow for compromise can be quite useful or not depending on the situation. It can be used to effectively reach a one-sided decision regarding an issue, and whoever favor such issue and use a filibuster can be rewarded.

Now of course this doesn't necessarily come off as a good idea when you consider the possibility of trying to reach agreements and compromising because a filibuster is completely opposite to that.