America Needs to Break Up Its Biggest States | Hacker News Reader

America Needs to Break Up Its Biggest States

nytimes.com

Has there been any kind of study on the differences between majority rule type democracies where the ruling party can pass whatever law they want and a House and Senate type democracy like the US where laws need cooperation from both chambers to pass ?

Would be interesting to know the pros and problems encountered with each.

> This poses a critical problem for democratic legitimacy primarily because of the Senate. Those four largest states have only eight senators, while the 34 smallest states have a supermajority of 68

But this was exactly the original point of the Senate vs House of Representatives, e.g. balance the powers of states so a few/large could not dominate?

Indeed. But the disproportion between most and least populous state has increased considerably since the first census. Then it was about 125 thousand in Virginia (including what is now Kentucky) v. 11 thousand in Delaware. Now California has 37 million people and Wyoming has 568 thousand (2010 census).

So now instead of a few states controlling a disproportionate amount of political power, it's the case that relatively few voters benefit from the power imbalance. Is that better?

Regardless, the solution to add more states addresses both problems.

Not exactly. The purpose is to recognize the sovereignty and equality of States joining to form a Republic. If a State decides to split into several smaller separately governed States, those new States should join the Republic receiving full representation as sovereign and equal States.

That is, the House represent people while the Senate represents States.

Perhaps instead of breaking up big states.

1. Combine small states.

2. Assign senators proportionately.

3. Turn the Senate into the British Equivalent of the House of Lords.

But the point of the Senate is to reafirm State sovereignty, which is fundental to the Republic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com