Fogdog
Well-Known Member
You don't read very well. I absolutely agree that the Senate is the check on power of more populous regions as it should be."voters in small states an outsized voice".
Like Wyoming, which per capita is way more productive than California?
So you don't agree our congressional structure of two houses is the best compromise of being represented equally and by populous. Furthermore, if you research your own position a little more you will realize that you don't believe in a local state boundary at all, just one large all encompassing state.
The President of the United States ought to be the the selected leader of the people of the United States, not the selected leader of small states. The house was supposed to represent proportional to population. But gerrymandering is stifling the majority. The die is pretty much cast that most states will have small populations and a few will have large ones until something changes to bring more prosperity to rural areas. It's absurd that there is no voice for the majority in Washington today.
If enough EC votes are pledged to the majority winner in the presidential race, then this absurdity will end. 165 EC votes are in the bag, 105 more to go.
I don't do libertarian speak and can't follow your theological argument about state boundaries.