3 ms·

We don't need anything so complicated, we just need to return to the house and electoral college being periodically resized according to census data rather than

by t-3 4y ago

We don't need anything so complicated, we just need to return to the house and electoral college being periodically resized according to census data rather than fixed at 435. Those reversions would solve most electoral problems without even needing to touch hard issues of engineering fair an trustworthy alternative voting systems.

dragonwriter 4y ago
> Those reversions would solve most electoral problems No, they wouldn't, as the problems (including duopoly) predate the changes you would reverse.
- t-3 4y ago
  The population, level of urbanization, and amount of information were all far less back then. It would be a lot harder for two parties to completely control an 8000 member congress or gerrymander that many districts.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > The population, level of urbanization, and amount of information were all far less back then. To the extent those are relevant, they magnify the problems now (with or without more districts), rather than mitigating them. > It would be a lot harder for two parties to completely control an 8000 member congress or gerrymander that many districts. More districts make gerrymandering easier, not harder. As does more information. Sure, there'd be more independents (absolute count), and at least one more often, in an 8000 member House, but proportionate to the total, there'd probably be fewer, on average, than there have been with the 435 member House.