Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jacksonian

(736 posts)
2. Actually, a solution to the EC
Fri Jul 10, 2020, 01:57 PM
Jul 2020

would be to go back to the original conception. The constitution lays out that there would be a House member not to exceed 1 for 30,000 population, this was changed in 1911 to being fixed at 435 to stop the size of the House from growing out of control. Right now, if we think of Wyoming as having population sufficent for 1 rep, California should have 61 under the old system and an extra 11 EC votes. This "fixing" of the House apportionment is just leading the EC ever farther from equal and rational representation as the population grows.

If we just made the EC to reflect what the original framers intended as to the makeup of the House, again taking WY as population for 1 House member, today there would be something like 759 total EC votes (328.2 million divided by @ 500,000 plus 100 senators and 3 DC votes) and the small state over-influence would be lessened considerably - but not totally eliminated.

Repeal the 1911 law (not a bad idea, fixes a lot of gerrymandering issues as well) and replace it with a more democratic apportionment that doesn't eternally erode large state representation. AFAIK, this can be done simply by Congressional action.

Or we could just chuck the loathsome thing.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»The real American deep st...»Reply #2