3 ms·

He's talking about the US Senate, which legislates national issues. Because each state gets two votes, the more rural, conservative states end up acting as a bl

He's talking about the US Senate, which legislates national issues. Because each state gets two votes, the more rural, conservative states end up acting as a bloc, giving them (often vastly) disproportional power over the majority.

gadflyinyoureye 4y ago
That's the whole point of the compromise. What needs to be fixed is the cap on the House. Remove that and the larger states get more power in the House. For example the Democrats could get a majority to push legislation to protect abortion at the national level. People need to fix the issues in the system rather than relying on the courts to legislate for Congress.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  Don't misrepresent the "point of the compromise". The Senate exists because of slavery and for no other reason. The constitution would not have been ratified by the slave states without the disproportionate representation of the Senate, because even in the 18th century the overwhelming majority of voting people would have voted to abolish slavery. Jefferson and the other slavers knew this. The Senate is not some kind of beautiful compromise between the city and the country. It is a capitulation to Jefferson, who was really, really super into slavery.
  - gadflyinyoureye 4y ago
    This is patently false. Small, slave free States existed during the authorship of the Constitution. They were afraid of being steamrolled by their larger northern neighbors just as much as the antebellum South. It was the carrot to bring such states into the new Constitutional union. Did the slave States like this compromise, yes. Is that the only reason for it? No. "To the framers themselves, Madison explained that the Senate would be a "necessary fence" against the "fickleness and passion" that tended to influence the attitudes of the general public and members of the House of Representatives." - https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Senate_Created.htm https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Senate_C...
    - jeffbee 4y ago
      The small states had obvious reasons to support the great compromise, but that's not the question. The question is why did Virginia agree to it, when they were more populous than half the other states combined, and therefore would have naturally wanted proportional representation, as indeed was the original Madison plan. And the reason is: slavery. It's completely central to the entire constitution, from the senate to the 3/5th "compromise" to the electoral college.
      - selimthegrim 4y ago
        We are post Baker vs Carr and 17th amendment now, can you really still give that argument?
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]

gadflyinyoureye 4y ago

That's the whole point of the compromise. What needs to be fixed is the cap on the House. Remove that and the larger states get more power in the House. For example the Democrats could get a majority to push legislation to protect abortion at the national level. People need to fix the issues in the system rather than relying on the courts to legislate for Congress.

jeffbee 4y ago
Don't misrepresent the "point of the compromise". The Senate exists because of slavery and for no other reason. The constitution would not have been ratified by the slave states without the disproportionate representation of the Senate, because even in the 18th century the overwhelming majority of voting people would have voted to abolish slavery. Jefferson and the other slavers knew this. The Senate is not some kind of beautiful compromise between the city and the country. It is a capitulation to Jefferson, who was really, really super into slavery.
- gadflyinyoureye 4y ago
  This is patently false. Small, slave free States existed during the authorship of the Constitution. They were afraid of being steamrolled by their larger northern neighbors just as much as the antebellum South. It was the carrot to bring such states into the new Constitutional union. Did the slave States like this compromise, yes. Is that the only reason for it? No. "To the framers themselves, Madison explained that the Senate would be a "necessary fence" against the "fickleness and passion" that tended to influence the attitudes of the general public and members of the House of Representatives." - https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Senate_Created.htm https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Senate_C...
  - jeffbee 4y ago
    The small states had obvious reasons to support the great compromise, but that's not the question. The question is why did Virginia agree to it, when they were more populous than half the other states combined, and therefore would have naturally wanted proportional representation, as indeed was the original Madison plan. And the reason is: slavery. It's completely central to the entire constitution, from the senate to the 3/5th "compromise" to the electoral college.
    - selimthegrim 4y ago
      We are post Baker vs Carr and 17th amendment now, can you really still give that argument?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]