[supercat]

I will admit, repealing the 17th would be of greater benefit if the Supreme Court hadn’t ruled that all legislative houses must have proportional representation. I suspect there would be more houses in the Republican camp if some were based on geographical representation, not proportional.

Remind me the basis for such an absurd ruling?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Population disparities among legislative districts, according to Wikipedia:

Reynolds v. Sims

Also, from Wikipedia on Baker v. Carr:

Having declared reapportionment issues justiciable in Baker, the court laid out a new test for evaluating such claims in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964). In that case, the Court formulated the famous "one-man, one-vote" standard for legislative districting, holding that each individual had to be weighted equally in legislative apportionment. The Court decided that in states with bi-cameral legislatures both houses had to be apportioned on this standard, voiding the provision of the Arizona constitution which had provided for two state senators from each county, the California constitution providing for one senator from each county, and similar provisions elsewhere.