3 ms·

8. There is no reason to give equal votes to all states. Why should citizes have unequal voting power ?. It is undemocratic in the U.S, The amount of power cons

8. There is no reason to give equal votes to all states. Why should citizes have unequal voting power ?. It is undemocratic in the U.S, The amount of power conservatives is disproportionate to the actual percentage of the population that wants them. 7. Jury system is not without its flaws. You talk about colonial era policy reformation. Juries are a commonwealth tradition! Mostly colonial countries have them. india had them till the 50-60s, it was intentionally removed as part of justice reformation. 5. In a federal or union government the state should have this power. The integrity of the state requires this power. This excerise of this power needs strong checks and balances in place , but lack of adequate controls is not a reason not to remove it entirely. 6. Elected officials always have final decision making power. Civil servants are career professionals sure have the ability to influence the decision making in what and how they present information to elected officials, abolishing civil service is basically like having a company with only senior management and no middle management. Who will execute the policy decisions? 4. Governor's power in states (not union territories or ncr) is actually pretty limited and largely ceremonial. The president and governors are artefacts of transforming from a colony. They don't have much power constitutionally by design. Electing them won't solve the problems of the office, they will just influenced by corruption by needing votes as before .

nullc 6y ago
> Why should citizes have unequal voting power ? Unequal voting power doesn't just arise from unequal votes, it also arises from correlated/block votes. Making votes unequal can counteract unequal voting power. Unequal voting is one of the reasons that e.g. people in urban centres can't just capriciously turn the far away state of Wyoming into a poorly managed nuclear waste dump.
- manquer 6y ago
  Nevada is a poorly managed nuclear waste dump. There is nothing its citizen can do. 85 % of Nevada is federally owned and there zero recourse for its citizens on how that is used. 49% of land in Wyoming is owned by the Federal government and the federal can and will do as it pleases with the land. The two senators are not why Wyoming is a nuclear waste dump. The Senate structure all through U.S. history is vestige of the comprise between souther slave owning and northern factions. The number of states, or what area actually should be state was never carefully planned or designed to protect any minorities, it was always political decision to keep power balanced from day 1. It is political fiction to explain it as to give minorities rights, rural rights were never the intent, no document ( Bill of rights, Constitution etc) actually talks about any rural or minority rights being protected , they instead talk about 3/5ths instead. It was always about slaves, it was a huge part of the economy for the southern states.

nullc 6y ago

> Why should citizes have unequal voting power ? Unequal voting power doesn't just arise from unequal votes, it also arises from correlated/block votes. Making votes unequal can counteract unequal voting power. Unequal voting is one of the reasons that e.g. people in urban centres can't just capriciously turn the far away state of Wyoming into a poorly managed nuclear waste dump.

manquer 6y ago
Nevada is a poorly managed nuclear waste dump. There is nothing its citizen can do. 85 % of Nevada is federally owned and there zero recourse for its citizens on how that is used. 49% of land in Wyoming is owned by the Federal government and the federal can and will do as it pleases with the land. The two senators are not why Wyoming is a nuclear waste dump. The Senate structure all through U.S. history is vestige of the comprise between souther slave owning and northern factions. The number of states, or what area actually should be state was never carefully planned or designed to protect any minorities, it was always political decision to keep power balanced from day 1. It is political fiction to explain it as to give minorities rights, rural rights were never the intent, no document ( Bill of rights, Constitution etc) actually talks about any rural or minority rights being protected , they instead talk about 3/5ths instead. It was always about slaves, it was a huge part of the economy for the southern states.