Opinion on how the Senate is Allocated

[brucejoel99]

Gonna have to go with HA. Now that Senators are publicly elected just like members of the House and traditional state-specific interests are becoming less and less prevalent (outside of, say, Alaska), it’s not like Senators really exist anymore simply as an arm of the state government to advance a very narrow agenda for that state. So really, the whole purpose of the Senate has kinda been nullified and now it’s just a less representative House. No modern American voter recognizes the intended institutional difference between the House and the Senate, they just vote for two representatives in Congress.

There’s no reason why rural voters deserve a voting handicap because racial, sexual, ethnic, religious, etc. minority groups don’t get any voting handicap. This is why the “big cities will run the country and no one will care about the poor North Dakotan farmer!” argument doesn’t work with me, because why should we go out of our way to give one minority group (rural voters) electoral protection but not grant that protection to any other minority group whose interests may be overridden by the majority? It’s inconsistent.

This, This, This.

Also...

Each existing State has equal representation so seems like a FA to me.

That is completely untrue. Wyoming, Vermont, North Dakota, Alaska, South Dakota, Delaware, Montana, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Hawaii, Idaho, Nebraska, and West Virginia each have far more Senate representation than California, Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey, and Virginia do.

No...?  Lol.

I think what Solid4096 is trying to refer to is voting power, i.e. that the voting power of a citizen in the smallest state of Wyoming is about 67 times that of a citizen in the largest state of California. Though taking his response literally, considering it was responding to "[e]ach existing State has equal representation," he was incorrect literally speaking, yes.