657
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Except that California should have like 60x as many votes as Wyoming.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

If you increase the members of congress, then that's going to increase the number of electoral college votes needed to win as well. So, proportionally, it all stays the same.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

The number of votes per state would go up based on the population of each state, not a straight multiply by x.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

They wouldn't though, the people in charge of changing this would not allow states like California and New York to dominate the process, which they would if it were based purely on population.

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Literally no one has ever suggested doing it the way you keep suggesting.

It would be something like the Wyoming rule because just scaling the house by an arbitrary value is asinine.

There is no reason to have arbitrary lines determine the vote rather than people.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

The problem is the people proposing the change and the people in charge of implementing the change are two different groups of people. ;)

You think, for a minute, the people responsible for blocking Merrick Garland from getting a Supreme Court hearing, are going to give states like California even an inch more power in Presidential elections, well... you have a greater faith in humanity than I do.

The only reason they haven't changed the congressional makeup is because they haven't (yet) figured out how to empower low population red states at the expense of high population blue states.

this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
657 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3696 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS