This question asks for an essay, which is a personal task that we cannot provide here. However, we can still develop some ideas that might help you in your work.
The House of Representatives can be considered both the people's branch and the insiders' branch. However, there is no question that the institution is now a lot more restrictive and less connected to the people than it was when the Framers designed it. Therefore, I would argue that it has become an insiders' branch.
First, legislators do not listen to constituents all the time. This is because each legislators has an enormous amount of constituents, all of which have very different characteristics. Moreover, legislators need to reconcile the interests of their constituents with those of other groups.
Second, the policymaking process makes it difficult for the public to monitor and evaluate the House. This is because common people do not have access to the necessary information to make this possible. Moreover, the process is long and complicated, and cannot be easily understood by all people.
Finally, partisan gerrymandering and polarization means that certain groups of constituents are much more important to a politician's career and support than others. This includes constituents in swing states, or constituents who support a particular party. Therefore, these constituents might see their interests represented more often than others.
You have such nice writing, i like cursive writing :-)
<span>J.B. is suffering from: anterograde amnesia</span>
