Income-Based Representation apportions representatives based on the percentages of a state’s population in each tax-bracket.
Representation based on the population’s income can be used to more accurately apportion representatives to the states.
Tax Bracket Apportionment is a much better method to distribute representatives compared to the current methods of redistricting and gerrymandering.
For over a century the current house membership has been static at 435 representatives for logistical reasons that are no longer valid.
Congressional delegations should now transcend Washington DC and operate in, and vote from, their home states.
With Tax Bracket Apportionment, the percentage of a state’s population, per income-tax bracket, would be equivalent to the percentage of seats available to, and elected from, each tax-bracket.
If 47% of the population are in tax bracket one, then 47% of representatives should be from tax bracket one, and so on.
Available seats are apportioned to, and candidates elected from, income tax brackets, statewide, instead of congressional districts.
The percentage of the population in each tax bracket will be equal to the percentage of representatives apportioned to, and elected from, those same tax brackets.
Incumbents, mostly being from the same tax bracket, would compete for available seats as determined by the population of their tax-bracket. The plan would reduce incumbency and result in representatives motivated to increase the incomes of those they represent.
The passage of an income-based apportionment act would immediately achieve for the people, an overwhelming majority of representatives in congress motivated to remedy social dysfunction and the national demise
A basic understanding of apportionment and redistricting is recommended to fully appreciate tax-bracket apportionment and income-based representation.