I know we all know this, but man the whole 2 senators for every state thing is just pure bullshit. California having the same representation in the senate as Rhode Island or North Dakota is so fucking dumb.
4 Likes
It’s an improvement over the Articles of Confederation.
1 Like
boggles the mind that bicameral systems exist anywhere
San Diego County excluding the city of San Diego has as many people as Idaho. Idaho has more people than 12 other states. Los Angeles county has 3x the people of San Diego county…
2 Likes
More than a third of national legislative bodies are bicameral, I believe.
one third? i would have guessed at least three fourths.
which ones aren’t bicameral? china and the eu come to mind. i’d have to look up the rest
The Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers) are a de facto second chamber in the EU. Countries representing 35% of the population can block any legislation and the members of the council are not elected for this position, but serve ex officio as members of the national governments. So on paper that is in some ways even worse than the US Senate. Since it used to be that you needed unanimous consent in the Council, this is still seen as a step towards democratizing the EU - while sacrificing national sovereignty.
2 Likes
That’s how the far-right feels in the Czech Republic.
As I’m sure governing centre left parties feel in other countries. It’s a barrier which works well when its your side being protected and poorly when it doesn’t. That’s democracy for you. Unfortunately and inexplicably, right wing governments still get elected in functioning democracies. Does it make the House of Lords or the Senate any less of a joke to me? Not really.
Saudi Arabia just like fuck all yall
4 Likes
…and the pope just says “lol”.
how bicameral is the UK actually? What can the house of lords actually do?
also, obligatory lol brits:
murk finally called over chewbacca in alaska btw
I’d be fine with a bicameral legislature in general, if there weren’t massive issues of proportionality. Like let Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, etc come together and vote for two senators. Or let California get like 40 senators.
The concept of requiring a higher legislative body to get elected by a larger population does reduce craziness, and in theory having six year terms instead of two has merits - not sure they’re working out as such right now, though.
But there’s a reason the craziest Republicans are in the House and the Herschel Walkers of the world mostly come up short.
1 Like
What absolutely should be done is expanding the House such that the population of the least populous state equals the number of people per representative. Wyoming’s House rep has a disproportionate amount of power also.
4 Likes
The effect of gerrymandering is also stronger with a smaller number of representatives for a given population.
1 Like
Trump thinks so.
1 Like
What would the senate look like if this were the map?
(Pretty sure I’d be in a reddish purple state with this configuration)
2 Likes
Yeap. Just uncap or up the cap on the house… it’s some fever dream bullshit it would be “too unruly” or whatever if they add more seats. It’s simply another form of manipulation, and the entire premise between the Senate being 2 per state was so that smaller states got equal representation in one of the chambers. Capping the house just kneecaps high population states in both chambers of congress, and then they get further disenfranchised by the electoral college.
USA #1!
1 Like