There are three areas where I believe the Constitution allows for a more equitable government going forward in the 21st Century.
First, Article Three does not proscribe a size for the Supreme Court (nor for lower courts). We can expand the Court.
Second, Article One does not specify the size of the House of Representatives. Let’s increase the HoR for the first time since 1920.
The third point also involves Article One and would mean amending the Constitution. Article One, Section Three gives each state two Senators which is unfair. It should be changed.
In every other area of government, the Supreme Court has found that the doctrine of “one man, one vote” prevails. But because two Senators per state is written into the Constitution, the Supreme Court will not find that equal or even equitable representation is required.
And, because of the complex construction of the United States, I think that equal representation in the Senate is impossible as the Constitution is currently written. We must more equitably distribute delegates to the U.S. Senate. I would do that by increasing the Senate by 50 (fifty) members.
Additional Senatorial seats would be allocated to states based upon population. The three largest states would be apportioned five Senators. The next nine largest would be apportioned four Senators each, and twenty-three states would be apportioned three Senators. Every other state would have two Senators representing them in Congress.
Of course, not all Senators would be added at the same time. Currently, Senate seats are divided into Classes One, Two and Three. After a federal census, say in 2030 there would be a reapportionment for the House of Representatives. At the same time there would be an apportionment for new seats in the Senate. States would not be able to add a new Senator until they had an open Class. For state adding multiple Senate seats, they would be allowed to add only one new Senator every two years.
In other words, if California, by far our largest state, had incumbent elections for Senator in 2032 and 2034, it would not be eligible to elect a third Senator until 2036. Then in 2038 it would vote for a second new Senator. The same year it would have an election for an incumbent Senator’s seat. The same would happen in 2040. In 2042, the first added Senator would now be an incumbent and be running alone.
Language in the amendment would require that all Senatorial seats be at-large. Texas would get three new seats and the crazies in that State Legislature would try to divide into representative districts. Districts can be gerrymandered. New York, Fla and Cali would do the same thing, I’m sure.
The way this will pass is that 35 states are offered additional representation. The argument to state legislatures must be, “More representation, more grease!” That’s something the goobers back home can’t pass up. Plus: more federal jobs, more military money, more infrastructure money.
There are some problems with this. Kentucky isn’t going to want to give up Moscow Mitch. Small states will hate it and resist, but if all the medium-sized states that get an extra Senator act according to their interests, they’ll go for it. I think a couple of small states would vote for it, too, namely Vermont, Rhode Island and, perhaps, Hawaii.
There are also problems with reapportionment in the opposite direction. I’ve thought about it a little bit and at this point it doesn’t seem the biggest concern.
I believe in more Democracy, not less. I want to walk down the street and knock on my Rep’s door. So telling me this is never going to happen is something I know.
What do you think about the unfair nature of the US Senate? How can it be fixed?
