Message from Jeremy in Athens #piraeus_politics_news
That's the counterbalance taht you're doing away with
This is what the French do. Their senate is elected by citizens who themselves hold elected positions. The idea is that local officials will naturally outnumber central level officials, thus the senator will need to please local governments over central gov to get reelected. France is a very centralized state thou, by design.
But you're allowing the represenatitives to pick those two senators, Jeremy
How is that an improvement?
How is it not?
Depending on how you implement it, at best it makes no difference
At worst you're more likely to get senators from the majority vote in the state
Rather than the possibility of a mix
Well, tbh I wouldn't make it representatives alone to vote them in (if I were to try to implement this idea). I'd go with the French option: *all* elected officials, including city councilors and mayors and whatnot.
The goal of a senate like that is not to be representative thou
It's to incentivize distribution of power
the house is to be representative
and senate to prevent that representation to centralize power too ezly
das the idea
It's by no means a foolproof system thou
but at least it's *some* kind of systematized incentive to prevent the excessive centralization of power
The US system of government is failing because they've allowed too much power to be handed to the federal government
Read what I wrote, and you will see. As it stands now, fly-over country has little sway over the legislative futures of their elected Senators, as evinced by the past century, since the 17th was ratified, and I explained in my comment on the matter why that is the case. If you examine what has been occurring among the Senate, you have Senators from fly-over country voting for regulations that directly conflict with the economic interests of their own constituency, favoring the requests of wealthy lobbies from the coastal states you've referenced that're dictating your Senatorial elections in the middle of the country.
it wouldn't decentralize an already centralized system thou
I don't think what you're suggesting will fix it
Do the math.
It's more difficult to pump money into 435 district-level, 2-year terms, than it is 100 6-year termed seats.
Imagine the kind of money that'd be required.
money is not the issue
this is dumb
They'll do it comfortably by moving their focus to the local party structures, who will control those district level appointments
alphabet has infinite money
I'm sorry, but I broadly agree with Doom - you're moving the problem, not solving it
I think you'd be better off moving control of more "things" from federal to state level
No, local and small business interests would control the appointments made by the district, just as they had for centuries before the amendment was ratified.
I mean I know I like to meme this a lot, but you know what's a quasi-incorruptible institution of power? A hereditary Monarch. If financial corruption is your problem, here's *a* solution 4 u... Not that that would ever fly in Muttica.
What makes you think the party system will just change the plan on the ground to take control of those appointments away from the district?
This happens in the UK, btw
So it's not like it won't
They already do try and do this, but it's still the local and well-established families and small business owners who dictate the election campaigns of who makes the ticket for the House.
As it should be, by the way.
But again: this would not solve your issues even if it did work like you say. It'd just prevent them from getting worse or, more realistically, make the process of them becoming worse slower.
The senate is not the house