MillennialModerate
MillennialMAModerate
YaBB God
Posts: 4,050
|
|
« on: November 28, 2020, 12:01:07 PM » |
|
|
« edited: November 29, 2020, 08:21:44 AM by MillennialModerate »
|
I think this makes the population split more reasonable while keeping the senates rural state by state (GOP favoring) lean in place. So it’s not too much of a slant to one party. It also makes the electoral vote split more reasonable.
1. North Dakota and South Dakota = Dakota (est 4 ev) -2 2. Vermont and New Hampshire = New Hampshire (est 5 ev) -2 3. Massachusetts and Rhode Island = Massachusetts (est 13 ev) -2 4. Puerto Rico Territory = Puerto Rico (est 7 ev) 5. West Virginia and Virginia = Virginia (est 17 ev) -1 6. Idaho, Wyoming and Montana = Midahoming (est 7 ev) -4 7. Maryland and Delaware = Maryland (est 12 ev) -1 8. California divided into 2 = North Calif & South Calif (est 20/25 ev)
Brings the total states to 45 states.
GOP loses 6 Senate Seats total in (1) and (6) Democrats lose 6 Senate seats in (2) (3) and (7) Democrats gain 4 Senate seats in (4) and (8) (5) becomes a straight tossup state.
So Democrats likely gain 4 Senate seats without (though PR isn’t Safe Dem but Likely) and Virginia becomes a tossup so they could lose 2 to make the gains 2 or win both to make it +6. I don’t like DC becoming a state. (I like a constitutional amendment to give DC 1 Senate seat and 2 House seats). So these changes make the Senate still with a slight lean to the state by state (GOP favored) model as opposed to the population (Dem favored) model which keep the Senate as unique and diffrent from the House. But at the same time it’s at least reasonable - where now it’s a ridiculous slant.
|