1140

65% of U.S. adults say the way the president is elected should be changed so that the winner of the popular vote nationwide wins the presidency.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 28 points 1 year ago

Instead of tilting at the windmill that is removing the EC how about we do something much easier and simpler and simply expand the House of Representatives? Not only would this add votes to the EC and make the Presidential Elections more representative it would also, you know, make the HoR more Representative! For extra fun it would also diminish the returns of gerrymandering since there would be so many more districts.

All we need is a change to the Re-Apportionment Act of 1929. There is no good reason that the size of the HoR is fixed at 435. None.

[-] MiikCheque@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For extra fun it would also diminish the returns of gerrymandering since there would be so many more districts.

you should lead with this

[-] WHYAREWEALLCAPS@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

In 1929, each representative represented about 283k Americans. Now each representative represent about 762k Americans. That's almost a 300% increase. This means each American's voice is only about 1/3rd as powerful as it was in 1929. To have as much political power as they did in 1929, we'd need about 1200 Representatives.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 1 points 1 year ago

To have as much political power as they did in 1929, we’d need about 1200 Representatives.

I don't see a problem with that.

[-] SexyTimeSasquatch@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

And yet, having more representatives fundamentally reduces the power of each as well. Your vote is fundamentally worth less as the population increases. Something you're just gonna have to come to terms with.

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

That's a long way around to get to fair representation. It amounts to a distraction from the real issue.

We can achieve that now through fairness in redistricting.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago

There are only so many ways to divide 435 seats while still guaranteeing at least 1 seat per state.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We can achieve that now through fairness in redistricting.

No you can't.

Your way doesn't return the ratio of EC votes between the HoR and the Senate to what it should be. It keeps it stuck in 1929 and every year that goes by makes it worse.

Your way doesn't scale the number of total EC votes as our population grows.

Your way ALSO doesn't return the ratio of Citizens to Representatives to anything resembling sanity. Ratios of nearly 800,000 to 1, and growing, are irrational and break Democracy.

You could redistrict the ever loving hell out of the other 49 States but Wyoming would keep it's 3 EC votes and its outsized vote for President. It would keep it's outsized influence in the HoR and it would keep it's ranking as #1 in the Citizen to Representative Ratio.

So much of what everyone hates about our Federal Government today is DIRECTLY tied to a vastly undersized HoR. The body is simply too small to adequately represent a population of over 300,000,000 people.

this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
1140 points (100.0% liked)

News

23301 readers
3036 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS