By Emily Gonzalez
I’ve always understood the idea that Congress is made up of representatives who “represent” the area within the state they live in and that different states have a different number of representatives in accordance with their overall population. But the real question is: what does “representation” mean? And is “representation” achieved in our congress? The word “representation” in the context of our democracy has a sense of complexity to it. Since the beginning of our government, historical figures like Alexander Hamilton have argued over the scope of “representation” and its accuracy. Centuries later, this argument is very prevalent in our nation’s political climate. Despite the complexity of the word “representation,” we have divided its different forms into categories. Our “representation” features a descriptive, substantive, and symbolic representation. Descriptive representation refers to the question: Does Congress look like its people? Substantive representation is when the representative acts on their constituents’ wishes and when their opinion reflects this, even if the representative isn’t physically alike to their constituents. Symbolic representation can be discussed as the prominence of an underrepresented group in our congressional institution. As a result of this project, I was able to learn more about Pennsylvania’s nature of being a swing state, both in matters of congressional and presidential elections. Before Susan Wild was the 7th district congressional representative of Pennsylvania, Patrick L. Meehan (a Republican) held the position for 8 years, and before that, Joseph A. Sestak Jr. (a Democratic) held the position for 2 years. I also discovered that, despite the mass majority of Pennsylvania residents being citizens, there is still a percentage of residents who aren’t citizens. Although they do not have the power to vote in elections, they are still part of the American people that Susan represents. As a representative, she must represent those who have the ability to vote and those who can’t. I also realized that the duality of Congress allows an attempt to “represent” the American people. Congress has two jobs: its textbook definition, where it makes the laws, and its job to “represent” the American people of their district. I learned that because representatives “represent” different districts and parties, their ability to pass bipartisan laws or acts can become limited due to their ties to a political party. Although Congress is supposed to act as one for the people and by the people, the existence of parties makes it more difficult and strenuous for new laws to be in place. Through this research I learned that even though our representative, Susan Wild, belongs to the Democratic Party, she encourages bipartisanship and practices it herself. Rather than ignoring the issues presented by her constituents who don’t belong to her party, she makes it a goal to represent her constituents as a whole. I had never fully realized the scale of people in a representative until I had to research analytics and data regarding this for the project.
When debating the issue of “representation” in Congress, one can argue in support of our “representation” and against “representation”. For example, we can say that we have “representation” in our congress due to the increase of non-white congress members who are creating a place for minorities to be represented. We can also argue that there isn’t “representation” in our Congress due to the fact that most of these members are considered elite due to their ability to pursue and attain a degree of higher education. I had always known that, as constituents, we have the power to communicate with our representatives, but I didn’t truly realize to what extent we could communicate with them. This discovery allowed me to come to the conclusion that most Americans don’t like Congress because they feel against or for the representation in Congress and don’t realize the power they hold. The power is in the hands of the people.
Overall, this project made me realize that the word “representation” has a complexity that can be a reflection of the complex nature of our democracy. And that the actual “representation” in the house and senate can always be argued on the grounds that their representative doesn’t look like or “represent” the views of the people of the district. This project offered me a chance to learn more about my power as a constituent, the political nature of my current residence, and exercise my power as a constituent.
