Some ideas to fix the senate un-balance

[Zorba]

There is no way to reform the way Senators are elected since that would require a Constitutional amendment needing 3/4 of the states to ratify. The smaller states would never cede this power so the only way to reform the Senate is to dilute it with more state/Senators and removing the filibuster.
You can also get billionaires and their companies to encourage 100k progressives to move to each of these red states e.g. Wyoming, Idaho, North and South Dakota, Mississippi, etc.

Yeah, I said that up thread. At the end of the day, the constitution has some fundamental problems with elections, representation and checks and balance, but the people that benefit will never vote to change it.

That includes adding more states. Adding a new state requires congressional approval. Fat chance getting republicans to add a state that will give dems more seats.

 

[Zorba]

Nah. Just make Atlanta, South Florida, Southern Missouri, Eastern Carolina, and divide California into 10 states.

That'll do the trick.

Splitting a state requires the approval of that state's legislator. Those GOP state governments would never vote to split to give democrats more seats.

 

[Indus]

Splitting a state requires the approval of that state's legislator. Those GOP state governments would never vote to split to give democrats more seats.

Just tell em we can divide into 2 countries.. Trumpistan with all the Trumpers United and The United States of Alexandria with all the AOC supporters.

They'll split it faster than you can say cat in a hat! She terrifies them!

 

[fskimospy]

And it's perfectly gerrymandered enough to be represented by 2 Republicans - Mark Meadows and Patrick McHenry.

WTF am I talking about indeed.. how is that possible?

Gerrymandering - which is voter suppression in a rigged way.

I would like to hear from Fern if he thinks the fact that the most liberal city east of San Francisco being represented basically entirely by Republicans is a sign that our system might be broken, haha.

 

[fskimospy]

Nah. Just make Atlanta, South Florida, Southern Missouri, Eastern Carolina, and divide California into 10 states.

That'll do the trick.

This does kind of show why the Senate was a dumb idea outside of the original 13 states and an even dumber idea today. With very few exceptions there is no shared state identity where two senators represent some sort of cohesive group, there are regional identities. New York City has little in common with upstate New York but a lot in common with north New Jersey. Miami and the Florida panhandle might as well be two different countries, etc. etc.

State lines in most cases are arbitrary. Again, that’s why they are in neat little boxes out west. That’s why we inexplicably have two Dakotas but one California. The first step to fixing the broken system is to accept the old system was just based on bullshit anyway.

 

[Starbuck1975]

This does kind of show why the Senate was a dumb idea outside of the original 13 states and an even dumber idea today. With very few exceptions there is no shared state identity where two senators represent some sort of cohesive group, there are regional identities. New York City has little in common with upstate New York but a lot in common with north New Jersey. Miami and the Florida panhandle might as well be two different countries, etc. etc.

State lines in most cases are arbitrary. Again, that’s why they are in neat little boxes out west. That’s why we inexplicably have two Dakotas but one California. The first step to fixing the broken system is to accept the old system was just based on bullshit anyway.

There was never an intent for states to be homogenous entities. A Senator should take the time to understand the needs of NYC and upstate NY, or Los Angeles and the Inland Empire, or Boston and western MA.

I guess diversity isn’t a good thing. What you want is an echo chamber map.

 

[fskimospy]

The Senate was not my idea but is integral to the founding of our nation. It is on you to provide a compelling argument to change it. California’s frustrations is not a compelling argument.

I already did this. The basic functions of government are routinely breaking down. That’s bad.

 

[fskimospy]

There was never an intent for states to be homogenous entities. A Senator should take the time to understand the needs of NYC and upstate NY, or Los Angeles and the Inland Empire, or Boston and western MA.

Yes, I’m glad that Wyoming's two senators have really been forced to embrace diversity. Lol.

I guess diversity isn’t a good thing. What you want is an echo chamber map.

When someone has no real argument they tend to switch to impugning someone’s motives or character. Our current system of government is broken and dysfunctional. One contributor is that we decided to staff the upper chamber through an arbitrary process.

Still waiting on a defense of the wisdom of a system that gave us two Dakotas and one California. Any ETA on that?

 

[Indus]

I guess diversity isn’t a good thing. What you want is an echo chamber map.

There you go again misrepresenting facts.

It is thanks to gerrymandering and voter suppression we have echo chambers! Diversity is the biggest enemy of echo chambers.

 

[brandonbull]

Yes, by only representing 17% of the people. That is a huge issue and anyone not a partisan hack would see that.

Could be less than 17% depending how they came to the 17% number. It only take 50%+1 to get the seat. I don’t feel like doing the math to know which 17% they are referring to because even the beat case 17% is scary.

Maybe anyone that isn't stuck on "popular vote" vote stupid would understand the difference between Senators and Representatives. Also, Senators were originally chosen by each state's legislature and not direct elections so they were not intended to represent people but the state.

 

[FerrelGeek]

There was enough of a disparity in population that caused heated discussion among the delegates; hence the creation of the house and senate. Learn your history, boy.

What you really want is a system whee libs have a perma-lock on the legislature. Why not be honest about it.

Even that is debatable. When the Constitution was written the population difference between the largest and smallest states was a fraction of what it is now. We should at least be able to have a discussion about how to massage the system while retaining the initial spirit. Of course, many people from low population states are going to fight the loss of their unfair advantage by maintaining the belief that the founding fathers wanted 1 person from Wyoming to be equal to almost 70 Californians.

 

[fskimospy]

There was enough of a disparity in population that caused heated discussion among the delegates; hence the creation of the house and senate. Learn your history, boy.

What you really want is a system whee libs have a perma-lock on the legislature. Why not be honest about it.

You're making his point for him. The disparity in population between the large and small states caused heated discussion. That disparity is now 700% larger than it was then. Considering that, do you think the same compromise would be struck today? Don't be ridiculous. Circumstances have changed and so it's common sense to revisit things.

You may want to take a minute and think about what your second argument means though. You're saying that without giving conservatives extra special privileges liberals would permanently control the legislature. Doesn't that mean there's something wrong with conservatives?

 

[Thebobo]

There was enough of a disparity in population that caused heated discussion among the delegates; hence the creation of the house and senate. Learn your history, boy.

What you really want is a system whee libs have a perma-lock on the legislature. Why not be honest about it.

"boy?"

And what is a whee lib?

 

[dank69]

There was enough of a disparity in population that caused heated discussion among the delegates; hence the creation of the house and senate. Learn your history, boy.

Nothing you said is incompatible with what I said.

What you really want is a system whee libs have a perma-lock on the legislature. Why not be honest about it.

No, I want the legislature to represent the will of all the people. You are the one who knows your conservative views are growing more and more repugnant to a larger and larger portion of your fellow Americans but are desperate to retain power with fewer and fewer votes.

 

[fskimospy]

Nothing you said is incompatible with what I said.

No, I want the legislature to represent the will of all the people. You are the one who knows your conservative views are growing more and more repugnant to a larger and larger portion of your fellow Americans but are desperate to retain power with fewer and fewer votes.

The arguments on each side say a lot I think.

Why should we reform the Senate?

1) Because government isn't working well now.
2) In a democracy in a broad sense the will of the people should be implemented. Not always, but usually.

Why shouldn't we reform the Senate?

1) Because it's always been this way.
2) Because then conservatives would win less.

 

[soulcougher73]

The arguments on each side say a lot I think.

Why should we reform the Senate?

1) Because government isn't working well now.
2) In a democracy in a broad sense the will of the people should be implemented. Not always, but usually.

Why shouldn't we reform the Senate?

1) Because it's always been this way.
2) Because then conservatives would win less.

Yeah this seems to be their argument for maintaining the status quo. "Our side sucks, but this is the only way we can win and maintain power. A true democracy would destroy us"

 

[Zorba]

Maybe anyone that isn't stuck on "popular vote" vote stupid would understand the difference between Senators and Representatives. Also, Senators were originally chosen by each state's legislature and not direct elections so they were not intended to represent people but the state.

Ok, why should the state of Wyoming have the same representation as CA or TX? When those states dwarf Wyoming in every single measure possible, including size of economy and importance to the union.

The idea of independent, co-equal states deciding to act together died in 1865 if not sooner. I know that isn't taught in the south, but as a nation it is time to move on from that idea.

Does any state assign their state senators as one per county? I don't think so, I think they are assigned by population. So if it works within the state, why wouldn't it work as a nation?

 

[Starbuck1975]

There you go again misrepresenting facts.

It is thanks to gerrymandering and voter suppression we have echo chambers! Diversity is the biggest enemy of echo chambers.

Gerrymandering has absolutely no bearing on the Senate.

 

[Indus]

Gerrymandering has absolutely no bearing on the Senate.

But voter suppression does!

 

[vi edit]

I think the constitution was built around rational thinking and reasonable representation that wasn't completely perverted by corporate funding, superpacs, and dark monies (thanks Citizens United!). We're an ethically empty husk of what they though we would be. Hyper-partisan politics and the "FUCK YOU! MY TEAM WON!" winner take all get fucked everyone else state of US politics has us in shambles.

We really aren't truly represented. Senators duck and avoid constituents. Fax lines are not turned on. Offices aren't staffed. If you try and protest you are hauled off by the cops. Very few of them represent us anymore. They represent Lord Corporate and the money they pay.

 

[vi edit]

Gerrymandering has absolutely no bearing on the Senate.

But a whole lot of voter registration shenanigans, election site fuckery and and the intentional hold out on mail in ballots in many red states sure does.

 

[Zorba]

Gerrymandering has absolutely no bearing on the Senate.

Actually the whole map is a function of gerrymandering for the Senate. Read the history of states entering the union and why they kept getting bigger and bigger and why they were usually let in in even numbers.

Why would existing states vote to allow 15 west coast states? That would dilute their power. Why would a slave state vote for a non-slave state to allowed in? They might vote to take away their slaves.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Yes, I’m glad that Wyoming's two senators have really been forced to embrace diversity. Lol.

Diversity comes in many forms.

When someone has no real argument they tend to switch to impugning someone’s motives or character. Our current system of government is broken and dysfunctional. One contributor is that we decided to staff the upper chamber through an arbitrary process.

Still waiting on a defense of the wisdom of a system that gave us two Dakotas and one California. Any ETA on that?

I didn’t impugn your motives or character. You have a myopic view of this issue because the system is not yielding the results you desire, so the system must therefore be broken.

I’ve also adequately responded to your Dakota challenge, but you will never acknowledge it. I don’t perceive that as a problem of character, just the echo chamber you fail to see.

The Atlantic just published an interesting article that educated white urban liberals are the most politically prejudiced:

https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/583072/

 

[Starbuck1975]

Actually the whole map is a function of gerrymandering for the Senate. Read the history of states entering the union and why they kept getting bigger and bigger and why they were usually let in in even numbers.

Why would existing states vote to allow 15 west coast states? That would dilute their power. Why would a slave state vote for a non-slave state to allowed in? They might vote to take away their slaves.

Yes I am well aware of the westward slave state footrace. Orange County, CA has peculiar and interesting ties to the Confederacy. History is full of inconsistencies. Why are Hawaii and Alaska states but not other territories? It doesn’t matter. States are sovereign and get two votes each in the Senate, balanced by the House where population density matters.

 

[Starbuck1975]

But a whole lot of voter registration shenanigans, election site fuckery and and the intentional hold out on mail in ballots in many red states sure does.

Which again has no bearing on the Senate. I believe this thread is about the Senate.