Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 21, 2024, 09:48:36 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why not practically double the ELECTORAL COLLEGE to 1100?  (Read 11590 times)
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,815
Marshall Islands


« on: June 06, 2008, 08:05:07 PM »

Wyoming has about 500,000 people and gets a representative while places like california only get 1 representative for every 700,000 or so people. Isn't that biased in favor of the small states? But yes, they do have too much weight in the senate(something I'd solve by turning the senate into a soley ceremonial body).
Montana has over 900,000 in its CD.

The 7 States with a single representative are collectively underrepresented in the House.  They are growing somewhat slower than the country as a whole (all but DE and AK), but once RI loses its 2nd seat the underrepresentation will be maintained.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 12 queries.