Hacker News Reader

Comment by koheripbal | Hacker News Reader

This is one of the reasons the US has a senate that over represents rural populations.

Not really. It's just an effect of it. The explicitly stated purpose is to represent the states, not the people, as the original conception of the US was more like the EU than, say, Switzerland.

It’s funny you use Switzerland as your example, which has the Cantons. To an outside observer they are a first order approximation of US states. They even have citizenship!

Hah. That is fair. It admittedly was a poorly thought out comparison.

The Articles of Confederation were more like the EU, yes. The current US government as established by the US Constitution was definitely not, as it establishes a strong, central federal government with ultimate authority. The makeup of the senate, where each state no matter the size, has two senators was part of a bargain between the big and small states.

Which has its own problems, of course.

The reason the US has a Senate with two senators per state, along with a clause that makes it the only section of the constitution that cannot be modified by amendment, is because of the institution of chattel slavery. The slave states had a much smaller voting population than non-slave states and feared that majority rule would eventually remove their ability to keep slaves.

I’m not sure if you can say for certain the exact intentions of individuals who prepared the constitution hundreds of years ago.

Why not?

The founders were literate and routinely wrote down their thoughts (see citations at the bottom of wikipedia).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_S... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_C... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_Compromise

You'll have to do better than linking the entire history of the US Senate if you want to prove that the only reason the US has two senators per state is slavery. I don't doubt that it factored into it at the time, but to tell people in Alabama that the sole reason their vote is valued how the way it is is due to slavery seems incredibly revisionist and ignorant to me.

Consider that in Canada's House of Parliament, we similarly have votes in rural areas overrepresented compared to their urban counterparts. Did that system arise from slavery as well? Of course it didn't, and any Canadian suggesting so would be laughed at.

> Did that system arise from slavery as well? Of course it didn't, and any Canadian suggesting so would be laughed at.

Can you explain why? I probably have a childlike understanding of the histories of Parliament and slavery in Canada.

Close, but no cigar! The Connecticut compromise certainly did include additions about slavery, but in the end the 3/5ths compromise REDUCED the population count for slaves states, decreasing their proportional power. States like Delaware, with small populations were in favor of it.

The US constitution precedes the abolition movements by almost a century, slavery was widely accepted by the time the senate was created. This is false and revisionist.

The reality is that the early US was a lot more similar to a federation of independent states at its birth than today. A senate ensured the spirit of a federation would be kept.

"A True History of The United States": https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/612519/a-true-histo...

This book definitely agrees with GP and disagrees with you. You might want to check it out.

Thanks. it has true in the title. it definitely is the ultimate source of truth. Geez guys, just because ONE book says something it doesn't mean you have to believe it as the gospel.

Jesus Christ this community has fallen to shit. Shame on you

Interesting, I want to believe you, but while the Constitution was signed in 1787[1], while the first state that partially abolished slavery (PA) did so a few years earlier, in 1780. Was Pennsylvania not necessarily representative of the majority population? (the next few states abolishing slavery definitely come a few years later)

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-governm....

[2] https://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2012/12/before-there-w....

This is BS. The reason we have the senate is because the small states (like NH and NJ) would have never given the constitution their blessing without a say in the legislature.

Here's the 1802 house just to drive the point home. I suggest sorting by the "seats" column

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1802_and_1803_United_States_Ho...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com