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

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)
21. But our system was deliberately designed that way.
Thu Feb 14, 2013, 03:30 PM
Feb 2013

Before ratifying, the individual states were concerned that majority rule would be onerous.

The non-proportional Senate and the proportional House are deliberately set up that way. This system is working as designed, and the Constitution would never have been ratified if it hadn't been so designed.

Any individual can argue that it shouldn't work that way, but the union was set up on this basis. I think it conforms well to the conception of human rights underlying the Bill of Rights. Majority rule in the US under our Constitution has strict limits.

Since we believe that the rights of the individual sometimes trump the will of the majority, it is not too much of a stretch to claim that the rights of a group of individuals may sometimes trump the desires of a larger group of individuals.

Isn't that a silly idea? longship Feb 2013 #1
I think you're missing the point tkmorris Feb 2013 #4
Okay. longship Feb 2013 #7
Political Science standard zipplewrath Feb 2013 #15
But our system was deliberately designed that way. Yo_Mama Feb 2013 #21
Regarding this idea, my son was complaining the other day frazzled Feb 2013 #5
Not that I don't understand your son's point, but ... surrealAmerican Feb 2013 #6
Well, it was done because a bunch of alderman would have lost their jobs frazzled Feb 2013 #12
and the point is? cali Feb 2013 #2
I don't think it necessarily has to have a point Hugabear Feb 2013 #18
I live in the area labeled "Big Thicket". That name ChisolmTrailDem Feb 2013 #3
But, perhaps there are many Bushes in that area? Duer 157099 Feb 2013 #8
Haha! I see what you did there! eom ChisolmTrailDem Feb 2013 #10
people in Oregon would object to living in a state named after a mountain in California yurbud Feb 2013 #9
Neat. Made me recall another alternative map. PETRUS Feb 2013 #11
Better yet, Steinberg's map of the country as viewed from 9th Avenue frazzled Feb 2013 #13
Hadn't seen that! PETRUS Feb 2013 #16
I can see Russia from 9th Avenue! nt treestar Feb 2013 #20
A better idea: strip the Senate of the power to actually do anything. Spider Jerusalem Feb 2013 #14
It could be done by amending the constitution kudzu22 Feb 2013 #17
cool looking treestar Feb 2013 #19
How interesting. SheilaT Feb 2013 #22
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»One proposed map of the U...»Reply #21