Why isn't Civic Equality In The Vote A CIVIL RIGHT?

[eniwetok]

3. urban vs rural

I've heard this crap before... as if somehow one group of americans deserves a bigger vote just because of the choice of state residence. This has lead to the craziness that if a person moves from CA to WY their presidential vote suddenly weighs 3.5x as much and their senatorial vote weighs 70x more. I'd like to think this civic inequality would be SO distasteful to Dems a reform movement would have started centuries ago. But since it's couched in terms of how states are represented... Dems, the party where we'd EXPECT democratic reforms to arise from, go through life oblivious... buying into the Civic Religion that the House compensates for the antidemocratic Senate. But as soon as one looks at how any citizen is represented... the lie falls apart.

If going ANTIdemocratic is the "moral" solution to "protect" the alleged rights of some classes of people then those groups HISTORICALLY oppressed deserve that bigger vote. Of course that violates what should be a bedrock of democracy: civic equality in the vote where all votes weigh the same in terms of representation. The Bill Of Rights proves rights can be protected WITHOUT resorting to antidemocratic schemes that are illegal on the state and municiple level. Another way is to insure that only people from certain groups chair congressional committees so they can shape legislation.