4 ms·

I get the states are an integral part of the US but I'm unclear on why the Senate needs equal representation for all states except for the fact that the founder

• SllX 8y ago
  Because if one State could dominate Congress entirely the policies of the country would be disproportionately shaped around that one State. The State is an entity that matters, according to the Constitution, because the Union could not have existed without the States, therefore the Senate is the chamber of Congress which represents the interests of the States rather than the people which is the function of the House of Representatives. The mechanism for selecting Senators may have changed, but not the function of the Senate. Or to put it this way, why is it that the United Nations is designed to give one country one vote in the General Assembly and not proportionate representation according to each nation’s population? It is the same principle in play. From the lenses of the Founding Fathers, the Union was an agreement between States and People and so Congress represents States and People. The United Nations is an agreement between Nation-States and so it represents Nation-States, no single Nation’s and no single State’s interests should override the interests of all the other Nations or all the other States. You can disagree with that principle, certainly, but I think it is necessary for the Union to have both chambers of Congress. There is no function for a Senate that is proportionate to each State’s population to serve, and you would be better served by abolishing the Senate altogether along with the representation of the States’ interests in Congress and maintaining the House of Representatives as the sole remaining chamber of Congress.