I was talking to peeps about this in IRC last night. While I can feel their pain as a partisan minority, some of the things presented in this article as ridiculous:
Since when are legislatures required to do this? Personally I think CA could use a slightly bigger legislature, but I hardly think it is something you can sue over. As TimTurner pointed out, this won't really solve their issues either.
This one cuts the cake. Practically the entire US political system from the top down is structured to benefit rural voters over urban voters, and they want more? Good grief.
It's drawn to benefit people in low population states, not rural voters in large states. Upstate NY has been bleeding jobs and population like crazy, but no one cares because it's not a separate state.
This. I mean, I don't support further malapportionment, but you can hardly point and say "But Wyoming is overrepresented in the US Senate!" as something rural Californians should care about. They're just as underrepresented in the Senate as urban Californians, and have proportionate representation in the state assembly, but unlike urban Californians don't see the state government controlled by the party of their choice. I can at least understand their grievances.
Not to mention that Wyoming has zero representation in the California state government. It sounds silly to say that, but people are conceiving of this in the wrong terms. Making it about the federal government is highly disingenuous when the issue at stake is the state government. These people are upset with being ignored, and half the posts in this thread are deflection based on "they share superficial similarities with these other people who are not being ignored!" That is not a response.
