The Tipping Point

[Timsup2nothin]

With all the gerrymandering discussion on districts within a state....

Isn't the rule that every state has two senators the biggest gerrymandering of all ?

How can it be that North Dakota with 0.75 Mio inhabitants delivers the same amount of senators as California with 39.5 Mio inhabitants ?
How can it be that a voter in North Dakota has a voting power more than 50 times as big ?
Is that not massively in violation with political equality for citizens ?

And yes... most rural low population states are red. Likely a good synergy with evangelicals as well.
And cheaper per capita to nurture your base support with some special arrangements from wheeling and dealing to get the senator vote in some senate decisions.

That was by design.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

It is a series of compromises acknowledging that it's a republic. In theory, it would problem. In theory, it is to prevent the tyranny of the majority.

As well, when you look at total land size, especially usable land, the differences in senatorial power aren't as imbalanced.

Are you saying the amount of land in a state has equal wieghting power as population? If we are going that route, let's add in economic power as well.

 

[Hrothbern]

That was by design.

From the time of the founding fathers, settler-pioneers... a time of rural + modern nobility

 

[hobbsyoyo]

....and slavery

 

[Cheetah]

It is a series of compromises acknowledging that it's a republic.

A republic just means it's not a monarchy. The word you're looking for is federation.

With all the gerrymandering discussion on districts within a state....

Isn't the rule that every state has two senators the biggest gerrymandering of all ?

How can it be that North Dakota with 0.75 Mio inhabitants delivers the same amount of senators as California with 39.5 Mio inhabitants ?
How can it be that a voter in North Dakota has a voting power more than 50 times as big ?
Is that not massively in violation with political equality for citizens ?

The US is a federation of states.

The Senate represents the states, and the states are equal and have two representatives each.

The House of Representatives represents the people, and, allowing for some arithmetic, the people are equal and have roughly one representative for every 700,000 persons.

The arithmetic involved might not seem completely fair, but many countries have such rules. In Norway for instance, people in Finnmark, the least populated county, have several times the voting power of people in Oslo, the largest city. This is by design, to avoid too much political power being drained from the least populated areas.

 

[Hrothbern]

As well, when you look at total land size, especially usable land, the differences in senatorial power aren't as imbalanced.

yes
for a rural agriculturall society of farmers and some modern nobility, that makes sense... usable land being a proxy for the amount of farmers citizens.

But urbanisation is now there... and not a little bit.. but a lot

Political equality for each citizen.... isn't that in the US constitution ?

 

[El_Machinae]

Are you saying the amount of land in a state has equal wieghting power as population? If we are going that route, let's add in economic power as well.

Economic power is already power. I'm not saying that it's equal land that gives equal power, but that it's less disparate when you look at land size.


It's a compromise, a federation. Conversely, why should another State populating faster give them increased jurisdiction over my land?

Their increased population already gives them increased house power. Senatorial power is a check on the tyranny of the majority

Edit, used the word Federation instead of Republic in order to seem less stupid

 

[Hrothbern]

A republic just means it's not a monarchy. The word you're looking for is federation.


The US is a federation of states.

The Senate represents the states, and the states are equal and have two representatives each.

The House of Representatives represents the people, and, allowing for some arithmetic, the people are equal and have roughly one representative for every 700,000 persons.

The arithmetic involved might not seem completely fair, but many countries have such rules. In Norway for instance, people in Finnmark, the least populated county, have several times the voting power of people in Oslo, the largest city. This is by design, to avoid too much political power being drained from the least populated areas.

I understand that as an important consideration, and I think it is good to have some of that kind of balance.
But once politics becomes driven by a kind of political marketing and customer profiling.... as multipliers on a dividing polarising... it becomes tricky.

 

[Cheetah]

Oh, the gerrymandering is still an extreme problem, but I don't necessarily think the over-representation of the smaller states is that huge of a problem.


The biggest problem is, however, the same as in the UK: A non-proportional election system! It will always lead to only one or two existing political parties, and any democracy with less than three political parties is a failed democracy.

 

[Hrothbern]

Their increased population already gives them increased house power. Senatorial power is a check on the tyranny of the majority

And failed... looking at the current situation.
Senators that would behave with statemanship, with more distance and reflection, having cohesion high in their banner.... that works

The Senate is unfortunately now part of the machinery, not a separate control entity on tyranny of the majority.

 

[Hrothbern]

Oh, the gerrymandering is still an extreme problem, but I don't necessarily think the over-representation of the smaller states is that huge of a problem.


The biggest problem is, however, the same as in the UK: A non-proportional election system! It will always lead to only one or two existing political parties, and any democracy with less than three political parties is a failed democracy.

I saw in that 538 site as part of the menu choices how to gerrymander, a scenario where you gerrymander in such a way that you get max proportional representation.... quite good actually... but for two parties.
Multiparty PR adresses a lot of things in one go.

And if that would prevent that senators are just part of the political machinery, and exercise their role of more reflective, longer term (not the hype of the day), more statemanship... I see not that big issues.

The examples in Europe for the senate just tick differently. Because of multiparty PR. because of more of a consensus culture.
Even in two party UK, the UK House of Lords is no part of the current parliament madness, it stays distant from the turmoil, without losing its power/opinion/statemanship.

 

[El_Machinae]

And failed... looking at the current situation.

Yes, but it's still a check, with the increased encroachment of Federal power onto the State powers, the ability to bully around using population and economic might has gotten worse and worse. Turning the Senate into a representation by population instead of a representation by independent government would aggravate the issue where the more populace states have power over the less powerful ones.

Now, I'm in Canada, where our provinces have specified powers under our Constitution. But I can understand the urge for people to increase the centralization of power.

 

[Farm Boy]

Don't worry, those modern nobles have everyone representing them. Both parties, at their beck and heel as they lounge eating grapes and whining about why other people aren't buying *#&$ for them.... ohwai...

 

[Hrothbern]

with the increased encroachment of Federal power onto the State powers

Regional self determination seems to me more important than trying to get your share in the pod of DC.
But I am a bottom up thinker.

Both are needed.

 

[El_Machinae]

Regional self determination seems to me more important than trying to get your share in the pod of DC.
But I am a bottom up thinker.

Both are needed.

Don't think I'm defending their current system, I'm only trying to explain as I understand.

But DC is what encroaches upon local self-determination, and senators in the pod that represent you are the defense against Washington overreach

 

[Broken_Erika]

Don't think I'm defending their current system, I'm only trying to explain as I understand.

But DC is what encroaches upon local self-determination, and senators in the pod that represent you are the defense against Washington overreach

So your only defense is The Pod People? That's comforting.....

 

[Farm Boy]

Why should another State populating faster give them increased jurisdiction over my land?

Because they want more power. Congressional allocation makes immigration, be it legal or nonlegal, permanent or temporary, even more fun.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Don't worry, those modern nobles have everyone representing them. Both parties, at their beck and heel as they lounge eating grapes and whining about why other people aren't buying *#&$ for them.... ohwai...

Well you did elect G.W.Bush Twice and Trump its kinda a bit late to complain about growing power of lobbyist and special interests if you keep building the swamp
Oh well you had a good run as the worlds hegemony power

 

[HoloDoc]

Well you did elect G.W.Bush Twice and Trump its kinda a bit late to complain about growing power of lobbyist and special interests if you keep building the swamp
Oh well you had a good run as the worlds hegemony power

Hey, they didn't elect W that first time.

 

[Farm Boy]

I'm not following holographic higher and drier.