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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How can we have democracy when half the population holds 20% of the Senate? [View all]DanTex
(20,709 posts)99. I think race is probably a touchy subject for people arguing in favor of entrenched inequality.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
376 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
How can we have democracy when half the population holds 20% of the Senate? [View all]
CreekDog
Apr 2014
OP
Well California would support protecting gays from discrimination, Wyoming does not
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#300
so you're saying that our system is based on 18th century models, and shouldn't be changed
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#200
How does giving some people more influence than others reduce tyranny of the majority?
DanTex
Apr 2014
#52
A better way? OK, how about changing the senate so that each voter has equal influence.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#67
not true. when i lived in Arizona and Utah, I had no problem with CA having more power
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#221
I'm tired of people who seem to think that "republic" and "democracy" are mutually exclusive terms.
Spider Jerusalem
Apr 2014
#121
I'm somewhat off topic, but MI voters' banning affirmative action at UM is a case of the majority
AlinPA
Apr 2014
#370
I'm just throwing it out there for the OP to read , she could also read the Republic by Plato
oneofthe99
Apr 2014
#17
you ran away from it, you were quoting it and then when questioned you said...
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#255
Keep in mind that even though Wyoming may have the same number of Senators as...
Shandris
Apr 2014
#12
Are you saying that the understandings/beliefs/concerns of the people in, say, Staten Island
DanTex
Apr 2014
#69
I think the last thing we want is to pay attention to the beliefs or concerns of Staten Island
theboss
Apr 2014
#146
well the Senate is such that it would be akin to Staten Island getting 2 senators...
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#226
the question wasn't asking to rerun the 2012 election under the scenario you cited
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#227
Of course, I don't expect the privileged class to simply give up their privileges.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#195
Minority Rights are part of what seperates a republic apart from a pure democracy.
NutmegYankee
Apr 2014
#306
Isn't that nice. Shame the topic was the Constitution and Constitutional Convention.
NutmegYankee
Apr 2014
#80
I think race is probably a touchy subject for people arguing in favor of entrenched inequality.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#99
It empowered slave states over non-slave states, helping keep slaves from freedom
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#355
those against slavery wanted it to be 0/5! Counting a slave as anything over 0 gave...
yawnmaster
Apr 2014
#356
the slaves were human beings. they wanted to be counted fully and have full rights.
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#357
QUOTE me where i said that what the slaves wanted was considered in the debate
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#359
Do you really think they, the slaves, had much, if any, knowledge about how the constitution...
yawnmaster
Apr 2014
#360
do you think they needed any special knowledge to want to be thought of as human beings?
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#361
you don't think every detail of a slave's position in this country would be of interest to them?
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#363
That is right, I don't think many even knew there was a debate going on. Do you realize that...
yawnmaster
Apr 2014
#369
it is a REGIONAL checks and balance, ftmp. That is why it is not based on population. eom
yawnmaster
Apr 2014
#354
Why spend any money in a state like Wyoming in a pure apportioned legislative body?
NutmegYankee
Apr 2014
#102
you do realize that those supporting slavery wanted the 3/5 to be 5/5 a full representation...
yawnmaster
Apr 2014
#352
Your corrections in this thread included "shaming" me for mentioning slavery in this thread
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#91
But giving some people more power than others arbitrarily doesn't make things better.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#47
That's the very reason things won't change -- the people with power don't want to give it up.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#63
In that case, the question is, why doesn't Staten Island get two senators to defend itself?
DanTex
Apr 2014
#85
States aren't people, and state lines don't justify gross inequality of representation.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#112
"and yet they don't get two senators of their own to protect them from the bullies."
EX500rider
Apr 2014
#268
Not so good with math, huh. I guess division and proportionality are kind of advanced concepts.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#274
But the amount of representation per capita, which is what matters, is grossly unequal.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#279
The people HAVE equal representation in the House and the States have equal representation..
EX500rider
Apr 2014
#316
Yes, the senate was designed as an unequal, undemocratic body. This is a bad thing.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#320
The "problem" is that you can't differentiate between an objective and a side effect
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#321
Of course I can. But the objective doesn't justify the inequality of representation.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#322
We'll just have to disagree about whether the structure of the Senate is good or bad.
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#323
Would you change the electoral college? Or give representation to DC in the house/senate?
DanTex
Apr 2014
#333
DC representation, No. Electoral College, maybe - I need to think about it.
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#334
"That seems like a pretty straightforward case of taxation without representation"
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#337
no they don't and in DC they have no representation in the Senate, do you like that?
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#325
Yes they DO have equal in the House and DC was set up like that for a reason.
EX500rider
Apr 2014
#340
The make up (statewide election, 6 year terms, and separation of powers) would still be the purpose
TheKentuckian
Apr 2014
#231
Rhode Island's interests are a lot more like New York's and California's than Wyoming
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#241
California has stronger laws protecting its rural environment than Wyoming does
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#245
California has stronger laws to protect people than Wyoming (saw you try to move the goalposts btw)
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#295
Leaving aside all the arguments below, is the problem with America right now the Senate?
hughee99
Apr 2014
#40
I'm surprised that people are actually defending this grossly undemocratic practice.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#43
i'm guessing based on some of the responses that we'd end up with more gun control
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#54
The US Constitution was a compromise designed to protect the "rights" of slave-owners.
Romulox
Apr 2014
#60
The system was designed so that Senators represented the states, not the people.
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#84
We still have a country functioning under the same constitution more than 200 years later.
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#94
which sort of made sense when there were 13 independent former colonies
Warren Stupidity
Apr 2014
#187
States really are independent functioning political units with interests driven by local issues
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#307
One must understand the problems with a pure democracy and why we have a republic...
yawnmaster
Apr 2014
#115
"Changing to a more equal system wouldn't result in large population states having all the power..."
Jenoch
Apr 2014
#137
Right, but not in the senate. Which means that overall they are underrepresented.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#293
it's working as the founding fathers intended? you mean half slave half free nation?
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#248
they intended we'd fight a civil war and lose hundreds of thousands of lives?
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#298
Fascinating that support for unequal representation and for the NRA are almost 100% correlated here.
DanTex
Apr 2014
#129
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
lumberjack_jeff
Apr 2014
#273
That is not a privilege. Representation in the Senate was never intended to be based on population.
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#217
How can we have a Republic in which 20% of the states have 51% of the Representatives? n/t
lumberjack_jeff
Apr 2014
#144
so you're saying James Madison floated a turd when he opposed the non-proportional Senate?
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#170
i didn't ask you not to post unless it violates the TOS or community standards
CreekDog
Apr 2014
#181
I don't think posters here really have any idea what "pure democracy" in the US would look like
theboss
Apr 2014
#149
The Senate was never intended to be democratic, but as a check on the "mob rule" of the House...
Humanist_Activist
Apr 2014
#162
Regarding the overrepresentation of less populous states, it is still the norm in Western Europe ...
Democracyinkind
Apr 2014
#309
Who's playing games? Rhode Island was the 13th state to ratify the constitution...
badtoworse
Apr 2014
#304
I agree with you 100%, the Senate was a bad idea then and it's a bad idea now
Hippo_Tron
Apr 2014
#260
For states' power concerns, can I suggest the Penrose method of square root voting power?
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2014
#311
It's also similar in role to the upper houses of some other bicameral legislatures.
Gormy Cuss
Apr 2014
#336
This is why we have the worst society for the common person in the developed world.
Romulox
Apr 2014
#317