Idea: 10 biggest states get 3 senators
Unironic Kamala Harris for President Supporter:
Opposed because this idea sounds ridiculous. I'd be more in favor of abolishing the Senate, which I'm against.
Agonized-Statism:
Kinda defeats the point of the Senate. If you're going to put in that amount of effort, just abolish it.
Hammy:
Quote from: Arachno-Statism on January 06, 2021, 05:25:45 PM
Kinda defeats the point of the Senate. If you're going to put in that amount of effort, just abolish it.
Honestly that'd be my preferred option, even vs keeping it as-is.
The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow:
Quote from: Skill and Chance on December 29, 2020, 08:54:33 PM
It's an interesting idea, but wasn't this population metric even more skewed toward VA/PA/MA/NY vs. the other 9 states at the Founding?
1790 census:
Virginia (largest state): 748k people
Rhode Island (smallest state): 69k people
ratio: 10.84 to 1
2010 census:
California (largest state): 37.25 mil
Wyoming (smallest state): 564k
ratio: 66.05 to 1
Former President tack50:
It's a bit arbitrary, though the idea definitely makes sense.
My counterproposal would be for the 33% of most populated states to get 3 Senators, the middle 34% to get 2 senators and the final 33% to get 1 senator.
Of course, the US constitution makes it outright impossible to make states unequal in the Senate so it's not happening.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page