Posted on 01/05/2019 5:13:44 AM PST by Impy
In 1995, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan declared, “Sometime in the next century the United States is going to have to address the question of apportionment in the Senate.” Perhaps that time has come. Today the voting power of a citizen in Wyoming, the smallest state in terms of population, is about 67 times that of a citizen in the largest state of California, and the disparities among the states are only increasing. The situation is untenable.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Assuming that the argument “the states gave their consent to Congress to pass laws concerning voting rights” could fly, there is still the problem of getting small state senators to vote themselves out of a job.
The real issue here is that the left does not like the political structure of the United States of America. They know they could design a system much better than the Founding Fathers. A political system that could and would act quickly on issues such as global warming, guns, and democrats losing elections.
Don’t know that I’d underestimate their zeal however. In 2008, the people of California voted to declare marriage to be solely between a man and a woman. It was the second time they voted for this. In 2018 a senator from California declared such an idea as “extreme” and that anyone who belongs to an organization that supported such an “extreme” view be disqualified from holding office.
It’s how the Constitution set it up. Like it or go to somalia.
They want a congress of the senate?
Maybe California could peacefully withdraw from the United States and keep for itself all the debt and illegal immigrants.
Amen brother..!
I think we should return to the Constitutional requirement that the State Legislatures elect the Senators, not the popular vote of the state’s citizens. THAT would be a GREAT idea!
I don’t agree. Politicians are a-holes who would make bad choices.
“Using smoky back room machine polotics to select Senatorial candidates was certainly bad.”
O.K. I’ll bite. Why was it “bad”? Who did they end up representing? Industries or interests that States found important? Evil captalists? What?
I think it was supposed to be the “Rich” and industrious. They would “protect” everyone’s right to individual property by selfishly protecting their own. The House was there to protect US against THEM.
But now, there is no protection of individual rights. It’s all about who can give away the most of someone else’s stuff to the “voters”.
The Founders tried, but I guess we’re just getting the slowed-down version of the French Revolution.
[ Maybe California could peacefully withdraw from the United States and keep for itself all the debt and illegal immigrants. ]
As a resident of a state that is NOT California....YET.......
WHERE DO I SIGN?
Anyone who has SERIOUSLY studied American history knows the incredible difficulty the founding fathers had when drafting the constitution.
One group desired a straight “democracy” the other a totally equal representation regardless of the size or population of the state.
The grand compromise of course was the House determined strictly by population and the Senate absolute equal representation regardless of population. It was genius and has served us amazingly well for 231 years. The 17th Amendment weakened this grand design but did not destroy it.
This is common knowledge for anyone who has had even the most rudimentary Civics/early American history exposure yet these so called experts appear to have no clue.
I sure this prick knows, he just doesn’t care, he wants a “democratic” commie Senate by any means necessary.
Why bother having senators?
Don't forget Guam!
The counting of California's electoral votes negates the entire populations of Alaska, Idaho, Utah, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Iowa, Missouri and the independent district of Maine.
And he was one of the best Senators in NYS.
No, we need to address the abortion that is the 17th Ammendment, that the early socialist, racist, Woodrow Willson passed off on a gullable country, turning the Senate into a second House of Representatives.
The State Governments need their voices in DC.
Repeal the 17th Amendment.
Presidents have nothing to do with Constitutional amendments, other than advocating for or against them.
In any case, the 17th was passed by Congress in 1912, before Wilson was President and was finished being ratified only a month into his term.
I see him blamed for the income tax a lot also. As bad a President as he was he can’t be blamed for that either.
Whatever university it was that gave this moron ANY degree let alone a PhD. ought to be immediately closed and bulldozed.
I am finding it difficult to find non-swear words to say how stupid I think this idiot is.
We should also bulldoze the University that hired the goober.
The equal value of the government of each state with relation to the federal government is the purpose of the fixed Senate seats. Population representation is reserved for the House seats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.