Ma'am; if the object is democracy, then giving money and property interests the right to influence elections, and government directly is contrary to the object.  If the object is democracy then the Senate is undemocratic -with a state like California having great numbers on equal footing with a state like Alaska with only a handful of people. If the object is democracy the house is contrary to democracy, and to the constitution which says one representative for every thirty thousand. If it was a loophole it should be  closed because when  the house limited its number for its ease it wrecked the power of the people. ...Why is there a Senate? We see in the example of  Stevens of Alaska, that where people are not a significant part of the democracy, that it is an invitation to corruption. ....Just as the house, in limiting their number increased their power as individuals, it also made it harder for the people to influence their government. If thirty thousand people elected a representative there would be some push on him to vote in their interest. He could not avoid answering to the people. As it stands, with one representative for 600, 000, the power of representative is great and the ability of individual  people to influence government is small. It is leadership to division; and your example of redistricting is a perfect example. People seek safe districts. What does a safe district mean? Only that 45% can count on being denied their rights to self government in any district. Ask why we are divided!The  sheep are divided from the goats before the election and from there, division is entrenched. You have to hand it to the far right and left, because the weakness of the people is the strength of the special interests. The only threat to a representative in a safe district comes from within their own party which inevitably pushes the right right and the left left through primary challenges. How are the people served when moderate right candidates who are trying to serve their districts, and the country, are pressured and challenged from the fringe of their own party? Who cares? Since they asked for it, and the system they used against the people can be used against them as well. When are we going to ask that the system of government follow the constitution? We do not have the government we consented to, and they have changed the contitution without amendment.......Democracy is the object.  The senate is undemocratic. The process of redistricting is undemocratic, designed to deny democracy to vast numbers. Limiting the number of representatives is undemocratic, and corrupting. Allowing political parties is undemocratic because it makes a Federal case out of every local need in America.  Who elects  the parties? No one! Yet, we must move the parties to move the representatives, and once in power the representatives can feed  their parties or follow their parties, and select their own districts, again, to deny a sizable minority their representation. Two parties divide us as we are not divided in fact. Worse, they do not unite us as we need unity. We see that they feed division, and must know why! It mights seem illogical, but to deny the representative personal power, and to deny the party power is the key to making the house and the people powerful. If 90% of a small number send a representative to Washington, he can stand or sit on any issue, confident that his people are represented according to their interest. His confidence, and his certainty is increased. Whether he gets for his people what they seek is immaterial, and moot because now, a whole country is denied its needs. Who does get what they want from government? If the people are locked into a wrestling match some one can walk off with both their  wallets. Our government is about the denial of democracy so that people outside of government and events can rule us.  WE would not be divided, and could not be divided if government were there to resolve our differnce, and it would be better for them to fall out with bloody carnage than for us to be fatally weakend.  We are suffering the worst aspects of anarchy and tyranny. We do not have democracy. ..Thanks...Sweeney