|
To solve gerrymandering simply eliminate congressional districts and have any person who gets over 30,000 votes become a representative. The voting power of a representative will be directly proportional to the amounts of votes they received. This means everyone's vote will count unless they voted for some obscure candidate who didn't even get 30,000 votes. Keep the Senate as-is because otherwise there would be no point in having separate states, and I'd say that some built-in balkanization in a nation is a good thing because it lets people who don't like each other to stay away from each other. Eliminate direct elections for the President. Instead have the House majority appoint a President and a Senate majority confirm their choice.
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
Typo posted:the senate is effectively how 30% gets to nullify what the remaining 70% wants The 70% can also nullify what the 30% want with the House. By having both a House and Senate the states are forced to work together in order to do anything on a national scale. If there was no Senate the 70% could just vote to spend 95% of tax revenue on the 70% states. And you know what they say about "no taxation without representation"...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
The Founding Fathers were so adamant about state's rights because they hated the way a central authority like a King could oppress anyone he wanted to. Without states the east coast of the US will be under control of King Schumer.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2018 15:53
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:What problem do you see with Mantis42's suggestion of temporarily splitting California into umpteen states? Would that need Senate approval? It would need a Constitutional Amendment.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2018 23:47
|
|