General Discussion

Sgent

(5,858 posts)

59. Your right

Fri Apr 12, 2019, 01:47 PM

Apr 2019

I was thinking more as a theoretical issue, it could be done under the standard amendment process vs to change the senate to a population based body would require each individual state to consent -- so each of 50 state legislatures.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

87 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why Does Each State Have Two Senators, Regardless of Population? [View all] MineralMan Apr 2019 OP

Minority of white racist males want it that way, that is why Eliot Rosewater Apr 2019 #1

Nope. I simply described the theory that led to the creation MineralMan Apr 2019 #2

And you got it wrong jberryhill Apr 2019 #37

Thank you for this post. hunter Apr 2019 #52

Translation, boy were we and are we a RACIST nation. Eliot Rosewater Apr 2019 #55

Mount that one in your trophy case jberryhill Apr 2019 #60

Which states favored counting everyone (including slaves) as one person? former9thward Apr 2019 #81

It was designed to give the slave states more power. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #15

Not sure about that Sgent Apr 2019 #23

And what percentage of the population of these slave states guillaumeb Apr 2019 #50

See above link Sgent Apr 2019 #61

It was designed to get small states to sign on the dotted line. Demsrule86 Apr 2019 #32

No it wasn't FBaggins Apr 2019 #49

And what percent of Virginians were slaves? eom guillaumeb Apr 2019 #51

Lol... FBaggins Apr 2019 #53

An interesting reading on your part. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #57

Feel free to suggest a different reading FBaggins Apr 2019 #58

#71 guillaumeb Apr 2019 #72

Here jberryhill Apr 2019 #64

Thank you. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #71

And not only did they ensure there would not be a majority for overturning slavery jberryhill Apr 2019 #73

The economic system demanded nearly free labor. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #74

"Nearly free labor" jberryhill Apr 2019 #75

Of course. guillaumeb Apr 2019 #76

Enough to make a HUGE difference, though jberryhill Apr 2019 #65

Not really. FBaggins Apr 2019 #66

Maine didn't become a state till 1820 moose65 Apr 2019 #85

It was a last minute compromise, decided by ONE VOTE. There was no great consensus as suggested. hlthe2b Apr 2019 #3

Yes. One vote. And yet, that was the system that was adopted, as I said. MineralMan Apr 2019 #4

The spin has been for many years that this was our Founding Father's plan. That is not true. hlthe2b Apr 2019 #6

But it was the plan that was adopted. MineralMan Apr 2019 #8

When you fail to accurately attribute the vote to a 1-vote margin compromise it is deceptive hlthe2b Apr 2019 #9

I'm done. MineralMan Apr 2019 #11

I do not agree at all that MM was being deceptive. I have NEVER known him to be deceptive. pangaia Apr 2019 #19

There is a major effort to spin the decision on construct of the Senate with the implied hlthe2b Apr 2019 #24

It might as well be set in stone. It is not difficult to change but impossible. Demsrule86 Apr 2019 #38

And that is so dumb It makes my teeth ache... only blue states have signed on. Demsrule86 Apr 2019 #34

The EC compact only comes into play when enough states have passed to equal 270-- hlthe2b Apr 2019 #43

Does it go away if a state drops out and cuts the total under 270? FBaggins Apr 2019 #62

I believe so... but alternately the other states can enact legislation to nullify it. hlthe2b Apr 2019 #63

because it has NUMEROUS representatives, in the HOUSE. elleng Apr 2019 #5

It's the fatal flaw zipplewrath Apr 2019 #7

I didn't claim is was the best choice. MineralMan Apr 2019 #10

FATAL flaw zipplewrath Apr 2019 #36

We can't change the makeup of the Senate Sgent Apr 2019 #27

How could we make it less powerful? dumbcat Apr 2019 #42

Your right Sgent Apr 2019 #59

Where are you seeing this process? dumbcat Apr 2019 #67

That's true, but.... moose65 Apr 2019 #33

Not just Blue vs Red zipplewrath Apr 2019 #35

It wasn't based on some great principle of government; it was a compromise. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #12

Yes. A compromise. Everything involving an entire nation MineralMan Apr 2019 #17

I'm surprised you didn't catch the "one person, one vote" thing in there jberryhill Apr 2019 #41

Counselor, wasn't it also a nod toward the "House of Lords" concept in England? A HERETIC I AM Apr 2019 #54

Most likely, since that's the only model they would have been familiar with. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #56

Were they perhaps also modeling it after England PoindexterOglethorpe Apr 2019 #13

Sure. The founders were working with political theories of the time. MineralMan Apr 2019 #20

Sort of, except that the House of Lords has less power than the Senate. The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #29

I think an alternate solution NewJeffCT Apr 2019 #14

That is certainly a possibility, but would not change the MineralMan Apr 2019 #21

Senate controls ALOT zipplewrath Apr 2019 #40

And that's why gerrymandering is such a big problem. It has damaged the one person one vote idea. jalan48 Apr 2019 #16

And that is really a State matter, at least from a constitutional perspective. MineralMan Apr 2019 #25

It was designed to give the slave owning states more power guillaumeb Apr 2019 #18

That's not really true moose65 Apr 2019 #31

Are you counting slaves as whole persons in those comparative figures? jberryhill Apr 2019 #39

I see your point moose65 Apr 2019 #86

That was the purpose of the so-called Three-Fifths Compromise, The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #70

Burn the Senate to the Ground. maxsolomon Apr 2019 #22

What's your plan to do that? MineralMan Apr 2019 #30

You know about those people because I reminded you of them yesterday. maxsolomon Apr 2019 #69

Also worth pointing out that Senators used to be appointed by State Government... brooklynite Apr 2019 #26

Yes. That was changed by the 17th Amendment. MineralMan Apr 2019 #28

A Constitutional Convention would be a disaster. gordianot Apr 2019 #44

That is almost certainly true. MineralMan Apr 2019 #46

from my understanding, if you have a constitutional convention rurallib Apr 2019 #48

If those guys that made up the original marlakay Apr 2019 #45

You're probably right. MineralMan Apr 2019 #47

The founders had state legislators vote for them, too treestar Apr 2019 #68

Good discussion PAMod Apr 2019 #77

Because the US is not a democracy. doc03 Apr 2019 #78

As I said in the original post. MineralMan Apr 2019 #83

One possible solution to this dilemma - secession. Quemado Apr 2019 #79

So how would that be done, exactly, The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2019 #80

If there is no solution to this dilemma, the U.S. will become a minority-ruled country Quemado Apr 2019 #82

well ... ijs Lurker Deluxe Apr 2019 #84

You are correct, Mineral Man. I get it. Honeycombe8 Apr 2019 #87