Topic: Should the Senate be abolished?
Anonymous A started this discussion 15 years ago #8,304
I believe so.
| Poll option | Votes | Percentage | Graph |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes. | 2 | 29% | |
| No. | 5 | 71% |
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later[^] [v] #145,214
YEP. TOOK CARE OF IT.NATIONS WILL NOW BE RUN SOLELY BY REGIONAL GOVERNORS.
THE LAST REMNANTS OF THE OLD REPUBLIC HAVE NOW BEEN SWEPT AWAY.
YOU'RE WELCOME.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 11 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #145,229
My state doesnt have a senate. Checks and balances are good
I voted no
I voted no
PROTIP !!pMmAiEwOm joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #145,234
QUALITY THREAD
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #145,239
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #145,404
PROTIP !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #145,406
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #145,412
PROTIP !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #145,417
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 24 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,471
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,496
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,518
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,531
@previous (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
Because a small state with 1,000,000 people gets 2 representatives, that is 500,000ppl/representative.
And a large state with 10,000,000 people gets 2 representatives, that is 5,000,000ppl/representative.
In the large state each person gets 1/10 of the voice, as the small state.
Essentially, when voting for the senate, your vote is worth more in a small state. Everyone should have an equal vote, and not get the same # of representatives if they have more/less population.
With the House, each district is the same population for the most part.
Because a small state with 1,000,000 people gets 2 representatives, that is 500,000ppl/representative.
And a large state with 10,000,000 people gets 2 representatives, that is 5,000,000ppl/representative.
In the large state each person gets 1/10 of the voice, as the small state.
Essentially, when voting for the senate, your vote is worth more in a small state. Everyone should have an equal vote, and not get the same # of representatives if they have more/less population.
With the House, each district is the same population for the most part.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,691
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,830
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,834
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,857
@145,830 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
Except that the states are just made up of people.
There was a time when each state's government chose who the wnated and they would lobby on behalf of their state, but w/ the 17th amendment it became a popular vote by the people and they stopped serving in the interest of the state, and just towards a large group of people that do make up the state, really no different than a regular house rep.
And the senate does not simply go in an speak on behalf of their state, they vote on the same things the house does, federal policy.
California has a population of 36,961,664.
Wyoming has a population of 563,626.
The only way to fix this is to give California 128 more senators to make things equal (and other states their extra senators), or just abolish the senate.
A state with 65x fewer people than another does not deserve equal votes as the other. It needs to be proportional.
Except that the states are just made up of people.
There was a time when each state's government chose who the wnated and they would lobby on behalf of their state, but w/ the 17th amendment it became a popular vote by the people and they stopped serving in the interest of the state, and just towards a large group of people that do make up the state, really no different than a regular house rep.
And the senate does not simply go in an speak on behalf of their state, they vote on the same things the house does, federal policy.
California has a population of 36,961,664.
Wyoming has a population of 563,626.
That means someone voting in Wyoming gets 65x the sway for their vote in the senate than someone from California.
The only way to fix this is to give California 128 more senators to make things equal (and other states their extra senators), or just abolish the senate.
A state with 65x fewer people than another does not deserve equal votes as the other. It needs to be proportional.
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,868
@previous (A)
The point of the senate is to give the states a say in federal politics. The states are equally sovereign, that's why they have equal representation, like on the UN
The point of the senate is to give the states a say in federal politics. The states are equally sovereign, that's why they have equal representation, like on the UN
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,872
@145,834 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
> No it is important to be a moderating force
> moderating force
> No it is important to be a moderating force
> moderating force
DECADENCE
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,880
@145,868 (RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos)
The states are not sovereign, and this has already been established. States cannot leave the union (civil war), states laws are overridden by federal ones (supremacy clause), etc.
The senate at one point did represent the state government, but an amendment changed it so they were elected in the same fashion as the house, by popular vote. If they are going to just be elected by popular vote, then they are representing the people of the state instead of the state itself, and that is already done via the house. Senators do not have much of a different job than the house, they are not actually there to represent the state like in the past, this is only nominal.
You are defending an outdated formality.
The states are not sovereign, and this has already been established. States cannot leave the union (civil war), states laws are overridden by federal ones (supremacy clause), etc.
The senate at one point did represent the state government, but an amendment changed it so they were elected in the same fashion as the house, by popular vote. If they are going to just be elected by popular vote, then they are representing the people of the state instead of the state itself, and that is already done via the house. Senators do not have much of a different job than the house, they are not actually there to represent the state like in the past, this is only nominal.
You are defending an outdated formality.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,885
RonPaul2012 !4EB6xd.Oos replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #145,901
@145,880 (A)
The civil war was a terrible act of tyranny. It is to be abhorred, not adored.
Supremacy clause only applies to areas where the states voluntarily ceded their sovereignty to the federal government. In all other areas they retain sovereignty.
They still represent the state, despite being chosen by popular vote.
The civil war was a terrible act of tyranny. It is to be abhorred, not adored.
Supremacy clause only applies to areas where the states voluntarily ceded their sovereignty to the federal government. In all other areas they retain sovereignty.
They still represent the state, despite being chosen by popular vote.