4 ms·

The cap on the size of the House should be lifted, so that an approximately equal number of people are represented by each representative, no matter what state

The cap on the size of the House should be lifted, so that an approximately equal number of people are represented by each representative, no matter what state you live in. I don't see the problem in both California and Wyoming getting two senators, since that's (as you mention) precisely the point of the Senate. It's very deliberately built in to the American political system that the will of the half-plus-one majority does not dictate the direction of the whole country. If anything, the ever-increasing Federalization of laws and policies is the real problem: Californians living like Californians is fine, and Wyomingites living like Wyomingites is also fine, but there is a problem when one tries to make the other live more like them. Let's have fifty vibrant laboratories of democracy. > how many presidential elections we can go where the "winner" receives fewer votes than the "loser" before people seriously question what the purpose of our democracy is. I'm already questioning that myself, considering roughly half of all eligible voters don't even bother to show up for presidential elections -- let alone midterms, which is more like two thirds. If we consider that chunk that does not vote as being OK with the status quo, then I think we have a lot of room left before American democracy is really imperiled.

colinmhayes 4y ago
- prottog 4y ago
  That's glib. Do you know much about Mississippi? Do you live there, or have close friends who do? I live in a neighboring state and it's unthinkable that the people of this state would bring back slavery or segregation. In fact, a much bigger portion of the population here lives amidst people of other races -- break bread with them, celebrate each others' big life events -- compared to certain other states where an attitude like yours about Mississippi is common.
  - jessaustin 4y ago
    When will Jackson have drinkable water?
  - colinmhayes 4y ago
    you're right, it was a joke. What isn't a joke is that Mississippi has been torturing their prisoners and would 100% continue to if the rest of the states had not objected via the federal government. https://www.wlbt.com/app/2022/04/20/years-deliberate-indifference-justice-dept-says-conditions-parchman-violate-constitution/?outputType=apps https://www.wlbt.com/app/2022/04/20/years-deliberate-indiffe...
- nathanaldensr 4y ago
  Let's just admit that you have no idea what Mississippians want or would do.
  - edmcnulty101 4y ago
    - dang 4y ago
      You can't do this here. We've banned this account. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - edmcnulty101 4y ago
        That was clearly a joke. Look at my previous comment in my comment history.
        dang 4y ago
        It wasn't clear that it was just a joke. If it were a one-off, that might be different, but you've been posting tons of unsubstantive comments. That's not what this site is for.
        edmcnulty101 4y ago
- edmcnulty101 4y ago
  That would violate the 13th amendment. Abolishing slavery is literally in the constitution up there with freedom of speech and right to carry arms.
int_19h 4y ago
> It's very deliberately built in to the American political system that the will of the half-plus-one majority does not dictate the direction of the whole country. The problem that we have is the reverse - a half-minus-one minority can (and occasionally does) dictate the direction of the whole country. Tyranny of the majority is bad, but tyranny of the minority is even worse.
- prottog 4y ago
  What are some recent examples of minority-backed policies that are controlling the whole country? Things like Dobbs v. Jackson merely moved controversial questions back to the states, which is clearly not at all something that affects the whole country. In what ways are the minority tyrannizing the majority?
PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
> Let's have fifty vibrant laboratories of democracy. They'll need to stop trading with each other, then. cf. current CA legislation that will make it hard/impossible for other states to sell pork in CA that was not raised in accordance with CA law. Now, I happen to agree with the CA legislation, and would love it to cause a change in pork rearing nationwide. But you have to see the writing on the wall: with the level of economic inter-connectedness we have today, either large-market states get to dictate policy, or you need a higher-level body that takes charge of this sort of thing.
- edmcnulty101 4y ago
  Or people just don't trade with California and California doesn't have any pork.
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    > Or people just don't trade with California and California doesn't have any pork. That's not how it works in the real world. See how California sets the entire US auto policy.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
    This is not how it normally works, and I suspect you know that.
    - WalterBright 4y ago
      That's how it works for San Francisco, which is turning out to be not so good for the SF citizens: https://www.wsj.com/articles/san-francisco-to-consider-tolerating-opposing-views-11666809076 https://www.wsj.com/articles/san-francisco-to-consider-toler...
      - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
        The toleration of intolerance has always been a thorny philosophical problem. The WSJ article is clearly written as an homage to The Onion. Finally, San Francisco is not a big enough market to swing anything (or almost anything). California is, particularly if there are at least a few producer states whose sympathies lie in the general direction the CA is trying to push (e.g. with vehicle emissions).

colinmhayes 4y ago

prottog 4y ago
That's glib. Do you know much about Mississippi? Do you live there, or have close friends who do? I live in a neighboring state and it's unthinkable that the people of this state would bring back slavery or segregation. In fact, a much bigger portion of the population here lives amidst people of other races -- break bread with them, celebrate each others' big life events -- compared to certain other states where an attitude like yours about Mississippi is common.
- jessaustin 4y ago
  When will Jackson have drinkable water?
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  you're right, it was a joke. What isn't a joke is that Mississippi has been torturing their prisoners and would 100% continue to if the rest of the states had not objected via the federal government. https://www.wlbt.com/app/2022/04/20/years-deliberate-indifference-justice-dept-says-conditions-parchman-violate-constitution/?outputType=apps https://www.wlbt.com/app/2022/04/20/years-deliberate-indiffe...
nathanaldensr 4y ago
Let's just admit that you have no idea what Mississippians want or would do.
- edmcnulty101 4y ago
  - dang 4y ago
    You can't do this here. We've banned this account. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - edmcnulty101 4y ago
      That was clearly a joke. Look at my previous comment in my comment history.
      - dang 4y ago
        It wasn't clear that it was just a joke. If it were a one-off, that might be different, but you've been posting tons of unsubstantive comments. That's not what this site is for.
        edmcnulty101 4y ago
edmcnulty101 4y ago
That would violate the 13th amendment. Abolishing slavery is literally in the constitution up there with freedom of speech and right to carry arms.

int_19h 4y ago

> It's very deliberately built in to the American political system that the will of the half-plus-one majority does not dictate the direction of the whole country. The problem that we have is the reverse - a half-minus-one minority can (and occasionally does) dictate the direction of the whole country. Tyranny of the majority is bad, but tyranny of the minority is even worse.

prottog 4y ago
What are some recent examples of minority-backed policies that are controlling the whole country? Things like Dobbs v. Jackson merely moved controversial questions back to the states, which is clearly not at all something that affects the whole country. In what ways are the minority tyrannizing the majority?

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago

> Let's have fifty vibrant laboratories of democracy. They'll need to stop trading with each other, then. cf. current CA legislation that will make it hard/impossible for other states to sell pork in CA that was not raised in accordance with CA law. Now, I happen to agree with the CA legislation, and would love it to cause a change in pork rearing nationwide. But you have to see the writing on the wall: with the level of economic inter-connectedness we have today, either large-market states get to dictate policy, or you need a higher-level body that takes charge of this sort of thing.

edmcnulty101 4y ago
Or people just don't trade with California and California doesn't have any pork.
- HWR_14 4y ago
  > Or people just don't trade with California and California doesn't have any pork. That's not how it works in the real world. See how California sets the entire US auto policy.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
  This is not how it normally works, and I suspect you know that.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    That's how it works for San Francisco, which is turning out to be not so good for the SF citizens: https://www.wsj.com/articles/san-francisco-to-consider-tolerating-opposing-views-11666809076 https://www.wsj.com/articles/san-francisco-to-consider-toler...
    - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
      The toleration of intolerance has always been a thorny philosophical problem. The WSJ article is clearly written as an homage to The Onion. Finally, San Francisco is not a big enough market to swing anything (or almost anything). California is, particularly if there are at least a few producer states whose sympathies lie in the general direction the CA is trying to push (e.g. with vehicle emissions).