• JasonDJ
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    It’s not that it should be by population. It’s that the idea of the senate itself is outdated.

    Now the cities are the source of almost all of America’s wealth, power, education, and population, but they are forced to bend the knee to a tiny portion of the country. The whole system is way out of wack.

    Carving up California into more states wouldn’t fix that, as it would still put more power into fewer hands.

    • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I just disagree.

      The Senate is where the States have equal representation regardless of size, that’s the point of it. The House is meant to be where California’s population makes the difference, but the cap needs to be removed, imo.

      Without a Senate, the most populous states drag everyone else around by sheer weight. That’s not sustainable.

      Also, as someone who has experienced life in both rural and urban America, city people have lots of misunderstandings about how people in small communities live and make bad decisions based on those misunderstandings as well. It’s not like country folk have a monopoly on that shit.

      EDIT: Just want to acknowledge the point I think you’re trying to make about minority (often religiously motivated) groups passing laws that affect huge populations in cities where we have to live with each other. I totally get it, just to be clear.

      • Redfugee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Conversely, with a Senate the least populous states drag everyone else around by having a disproportionate amount of voting power in the Senate, just because of the state they happen to be in.

        • Monstrosity@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          No? I think I see what you mean, but the States all have equal power in the Senate so its more like tug-of-war and coalition building.

          Again, imo, the House is really where California’s 500 pound Gorilla status should come into play but the cap means tiny States hold disproportionately waaaaaaay too much sway. The Reds should not currently control the House, not even close.

          • Redfugee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I guess I’m not entirely convinced that states need to be represented at all.

            If we compare a voter in California to a voter in Wyoming, the person in Wyoming has a much stronger influence in the Senate and the judicial branch given that justices are confirmed soely by the Senate. Why should one voter have more power than another? Seems arbitrary to me.