# Senate becoming considerably less representative. Problem? Solutions? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 5, 2021, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716 "2021-01-05T15:58:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/41 "2021-01-05T18:54:36Z")
In Britain, the Parliament Acts provide that if the Lords consistently refuse to pass a bill passed by the Commons, the Commons can pass the bill by itself and once it has Royal assent, it’s law. I think that’s what **Hari Seldon** was thinking of. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/42 "2021-01-05T18:56:59Z")
But if they can amend bills, can’t they just keep removing the parts they don’t like and substitute something else, even to the limit of removing the entire substance of the bill and replacing it with something with no real effect? I guess the question I’m asking is: can you actually make a rule like this that works if the Senate/House of Lords chooses to be obstinate about it, or does it mostly work because there’s a norm of generally trying to come to an agreement about passing a bill that basically does the same thing and using amendments as minor tweaks? ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/43 "2021-01-05T19:38:58Z")
In the U.K. system, as it has evolved, the House of Lords essentially acts as a circuit breaker to try to slow down controversial legislation, give the general public more time to weigh in, and give the (in theory) more independent and objective Lords a chance to suggest changes. If the Commons doesn’t want to accept any amendments, they can just pass the original un-amended bill again. After a couple of go-rounds, with “royal assent”, whatever version the Commons wants is enacted. Technically, the Queen/King could withhold assent, but it has effectively become a part of the UK’s unwritten constitution that “royal assent” is a mere ceremonial formality. Royal assent hasn’t been withheld since _1707_. In the U.S., I don’t think you could implement this system without a double amendment. Even if the number of votes accorded to each state remains the same, stripping the Senate of its powers like that seems to me like it would pretty clearly deprive states of their “equal Suffrage in the Senate”. As you yourself pointed out, the physical number of people in the chamber doesn’t really matter. An “equal vote” that can be over-ridden at the will of the proportional-but-unequal lower house isn’t, to me, equal suffrage. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/44 "2021-01-05T19:45:13Z")
> [@gdave](#): > > In the U.S., I don’t think you could implement this system without a double amendment. Even if the number of votes accorded to each state remains the same, stripping the Senate of its powers like that seems to me like it would pretty clearly deprive states of their “equal Suffrage in the Senate”. As you yourself pointed out, the physical number of people in the chamber doesn’t really matter. An “equal vote” that can be over-ridden at the will of the proportional-but-unequal lower house isn’t, to me, equal suffrage. I think you _probably_ could, legally. There’s nothing in that line that requires that the Senate retain particular powers. A single amendment that guts the power of the Senate is likely valid as long as the Senate still exists and does _something_. Good luck getting 2/3rds of sitting Senators to abolish the power of the institution that most of them have spent decades of a successful political career attaining, though. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/45 "2021-01-05T20:01:16Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > Saw [this](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/heres-how-fix-senate/579172/). Response sounds complicated - and unlikely. Yeah, that plan was nonsense then and nonsense now. The problem with blowing up the Senate is that at multiple points in history, the Senate was the sane, sensible body, needed to check the lunatics in the House. I’m baffled that anyone thinks that because the Senate is run by lunatic Republicans today, it will always be the case. Throughout American history, a small number of states housed the majority of the population. From 1880-1930, the Middle Atlantic states alone counted for 20% with the East North Central just about that much. New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and what is now the Rust Belt absolutely dominated the economy and therefore the government. We’re merely going back to historic discrepancies. The Senate is a symptom. “Fixing” it will change nothing. The underlying society is what needs to change. If the parties can get back to representing broader swathes of the population, rather than being only leftist or rightist, then the “problem” of the Senate mostly goes away. If the parties don’t, then no cure is possible. ---
**Author:** ![Icarus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icarus/32/72_2.png) [@Icarus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icarus)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/46 "2021-01-05T20:02:16Z")
To me, the issues are in the definition of a US “State”. At the country’s founding, they were more akin to separate countries, existentially. That distinction of political entities has long since fallen away. Their shapes, borders, sizes, populations, etc., are fundamentally accidents of history. And yet we accept them as firm and to never change. Why is Rhode Island so tiny, and Texas so large? It seems there was no attempt to rationalize their dimensions on creation, and certainly none since. So, I ask, by saying every “State” must have an equal voice in the Senate, why so little apparent ground-rules on the conditions of what should constitute a State? And why no re-visiting of the those conditions? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/47 "2021-01-05T20:03:00Z")
To start with, make DC and PR states. Probably the Virgin Islands and Guam too. Those would all be easy to do (functionally speaking – politically it would obviously not be so easy), and I think could be done with 50+1 Senators + the House (and a Democratic president). Then consider breaking up large Democratic states (NY and CA, for example) into smaller Democratic states. But I don’t think that would be nearly as easy as admitting new states. Basically, do anything and everything remotely within the rules to gain advantage, until the rules can be made more fair and less tilted towards one party. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/48 "2021-01-05T22:32:04Z")
The problem is that a smaller and smaller portion of the population is choosing the governance for a larger and larger part. That is simply tyranny of the minority. If the the needs of a greater and greater majority are ignored and that majority is put upon more and more, then that is simply unsustainable. There are ways of resolving this civilly, but if the oppressors refuse to cede any power to those they oppress, then the resolution will not be civil. There is only so long that the majority of the population can be expected to serve at the whims of the minority before the social contract is renegotiated, one way or another. At this point, those small states have the power to be a part of that renegotiation. If they wait until society has gotten to the point where the exploitation has becoming intolerable, then the not so civil resolution will _not_ give their former despots a space at the negotiating table. As I’ve said on more than a few occasions, one of the benefits of democracy is that if the people don’t like you anymore, they have a peaceful way of asking you to retire. If you do not give them a peaceful way of changing those who govern them, then they will eventually resort to less peaceful measures. Democracy benefits the rulers as much or more than it benefits the governed. If Libya had acceded to the demands of its residents, and gave them a vote in the way they were governed, Gaddafi may be enjoying retirement right now, rather than having been tortured to death by those he subjugated. Jefferson _did_ say that the tree of liberty would have to be watered with the blood of tyrants from time to time, and small states greedily holding onto power and denying the representation of the majority of the people was exactly the sort of thing that he was talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2021, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/49 "2021-01-05T23:45:04Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > I’m baffled that anyone thinks that because the Senate is run by lunatic Republicans today, it will always be the case. Isn’t one of the major political issues in America today things that calcify current trends, like gerrymandering, FPTP, and voter restrictions? It seems that plenty of people don’t think that the current trend is going to change (anytime soon), so severe action is justified and wise. ---
**Author:** ![ekedolphin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ekedolphin/32/10003_2.png) [@ekedolphin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ekedolphin)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/50 "2021-01-06T00:21:59Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Then consider breaking up large Democratic states (NY and CA, for example) into smaller Democratic states. I don’t have numbers or data, but are you certain that Balkanized versions of California and New York would all be Democratic? Does Albany vote the same way as New York City? San Diego vote the same way as Eastern California? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/51 "2021-01-06T00:30:46Z")
Depends on how you divide them. But if the whole state is 60-40, then it’s possible to break it into 2 or 3 or 50 60-40 states with creative border drawing. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/52 "2021-01-06T00:32:26Z")
Albany does, surrounding counties not as much or completely opposite, and upstate NY overall is more Republican. Splitting a state isn’t going to work the way those that propose it think. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/53 "2021-01-06T00:37:21Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > The problem with blowing up the Senate is that at multiple points in history, the Senate was the sane, sensible body, needed to check the lunatics in the House. Could you provide some examples? I won’t claim that you are wrong, just that on most issues I can think of this has not been the case. > [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > The Senate is a symptom. “Fixing” it will change nothing. The underlying society is what needs to change. I think this is mostly wrong. The Senate is a system that gives some individuals more of a say in governance than others. I also hope society improves, but a built-in thumb on the scale is always going to cause problems, even if those problems are often not the most pressing ones. ---
**Author:** ![peccavi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peccavi/32/388_2.png) [@peccavi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/peccavi)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/54 "2021-01-06T00:41:47Z")
It is hard to imagine how you create 2 or more states where Trumpublicans have any significant shot. Here is the 2020 election map by county: > **[California 2020 presidential election results](https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/state/california/president)** > > See 2020 presidential election results for California. Then you have to take into account the relative populations of those counties: > **[r/MapPorn - Population Density in California](https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/hvuht0/population_density_in_california/)** > > 70 votes and 11 comments so far on Reddit Finally, I’ll give you two guesses (first one doesn’t count) as to how the counties stack up as to relative income. [https://rstudio-pubs-static.s3.amazonaws.com/581630\_272937bc8e754fa2ad264d74a218094f.html](https://rstudio-pubs-static.s3.amazonaws.com/581630_272937bc8e754fa2ad264d74a218094f.html) Unless you want to create one small, poor Republican state and one large, rich Democratic state, you’re not going to get anything but two medium sized Democratic states. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/55 "2021-01-06T00:57:47Z")
> [@peccavi](#): > > It is hard to imagine how you create 2 or more states where Trumpublicans have any significant shot. I don’t think that people who want to split California into two states have the goal of there being one Democratic state and one Republican one. That would just _further_ entrench the Republican advantage in the Senate. ---
**Author:** ![peccavi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peccavi/32/388_2.png) [@peccavi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/peccavi)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/56 "2021-01-06T01:00:15Z")
Sorry, I should have made my post an explicit reply to this (which is what it was): > [@ekedolphin](#): > > I don’t have numbers or data, but are you certain that Balkanized versions of California and New York would all be Democratic? Does Albany vote the same way as New York City? San Diego vote the same way as Eastern California? ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/57 "2021-01-06T01:06:13Z")
Ah, right. Carry on. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/58 "2021-01-06T01:15:29Z")
Constitutional amendment - each senator represents a constituency of 1/100th the total population. If Wyoming doesn’t have enough people who add up to 1%, they have to share one with Nebraska and the Dakota, and CA gets the 20-something senators its population entitles it to. Problem solved. ---
**Author:** ![E-DUB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/e-dub/32/403_2.png) [@E-DUB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-DUB)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/59 "2021-01-06T02:02:46Z")
After every second census break up the largest state and require the smallest one to merge with one (or more) of its neighbors. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2021, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716/60 "2021-01-06T02:24:44Z")
Ha! Reminds me of the Euro soccer league rules. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senate-becoming-considerably-less-representative-problem-solutions/929716.md?page=4)