[Tanada]

It has been discovered time and time again through human history that Universal Sufferage (one person one vote all of equal weight) leads to vote buying sooner or later when the majority flocks to the polliticians that promise the most goodies for the masses. This is commonly known as the bread and circuses solution to public unrest, but in the days of coin money it took many years to cause a system of government to collapse financially. TPTB always knew they only had X amount to spend and nobody was going to lend them unlimited money to keep buying votes with.

When paper currency became common the problem became much more pronounced, see the Weimer republic hyper-inflation for the first really spectacular example.

Universal sufferage also has the inevitable effect of making cities, with their dense population, more pollitically powerful than the countryside which produces the goods to feed those cities. Urbanites often lack an understanding of how the natural world functions, their lives are constrained in every direction by man made support structures. Even city 'wild spaces' and parks are actually very constrained in their makeup, dangerous plants and animals are often completely eliminated to protect the public for one example, and irrigation and fertilizer are often added to make things 'look better'.

The US Congress was set up with two competing systems of representation, Universal Sufferage in the House of Representatives and Regional Sufferage in the Senate, where the Senators were originally appointed by the legislatures of the States and were specifically chosen to do what was best for each state in Congress.

Having Regional Sufferage slows down the excesses of Universal Sufferage because the low population area's are able to delay or diffuse the 'will of the majority' by asking the question, "what's in it for the rest of us?" and making it stick. Thus in the system as set up in the 1700's New York City and Philadelphia were important in the House, but Pennsylvania and New York State were equal with Georgia and New Hampshire in the Senate. This prevented the Government from directing everyones tax money to benefit the two states with the highest population.

In 1913 the 17th Amendment to the US Constitution was added to the constitution, this took the power of appointing Senators away from the State governments and placed it directly in the hands of the People themselves. Because of this it was inevitable that Senators changed their preformance in COngress, while their job is still to make sure their state gets fair treatment in congress their chances of getting re-elected became enhanced by what pork projects they could get for their state. Because of the esoteric seniority rules of the Senate it became possible for senior senators to demand and receive very nice things for their states. See Robert Byrd as an example, he demanded and managed to get a lot of Federal Government offices moved from Washington D.C. to West Virginia, based solely on his influence. Their is no logic in putting a Government office three hours commuting time from the center of the Government.

Now our government in the USA has gotten to the point where the states with the highest population are getting the most senior senators in the Senate. 25 of the 100 Senators have been in that body for over 20 years. The fact that both Senators from West Virginia, Massachusettes, Connecticut and Iowa fall in this top 25 group gives those four states a huge advantage in government spending. Their Senators are able to direct pork of every shape and size to their states to secure their re-election by their states.

However those four states are not the High Population states I was referring too, none of those four are in the top ten of population. In fact of those four MA is 15th, CN is 29th, IA is 30th and WV is 37th. However if you look at the other states in the top 25 and compare them by population IN is 5th in seniority and 16th in population, MI is 9th in Seniority and 8th in population, PA is 12/6th, MD is 18/19th. AZ is 14/20th with John McCain. Odds are extremely good McCain will be inthe Senate for many years and after the 2010 census AZ will move up in the population ranking. UT, NM, and NV all have senators in the top 25 and all grew substantially in the last ten years. Probably none of those three 'south west' states will make it into the top 10, but they are sure to climb far up the ranks from their 34, 35 and 36 of the 2000 census. But what about those four states with the highest population? They are expected to all stay easily in the top five population at worst, CA, NY, TX and FL. Their Sentors in rank are currently CA, 27 and 29, NY 48, TX 34 and 65, FL 54 and 73.

Because Senators tend to serve for life once they have become well established by the time they get in the top 25 they are often elderly and in less than robust health. For example Ted Kennedy has a brain tumor and is not expected to remain on this earth for many more years, he is currently #2 in seniority but his replacement will be #100. This will greatly reduce the influence of MA on Federal Spending. Arlen Spector, now #12, has also been batteling cancer for years. Robert Byrd, the senior Senator was born in 1917, while he is in good health for a man of 91 he is by no means a young man. None of the other Senators in the top 25 have caught my attention with health issues in recent times but that doesn't mean much, they are all quite up there in years. For example Daniel Ken Inouye, the #3 Seniority, was born in 1924, Patrick Leahy #4 was born 1940 making him relatively young for his seniority and Richard Lugar #5 was born in 1932.

I am not wishing ill on any of these men, however time waits on no-one and it has caught up with at least half a dozen of them. When they go the balance of power in the Senate will shift dramtically to states which have been growing in population. PA with Arlen Spector is the only high population state liable to lose influence in the Senate while every other high population state will be climbing up in the rankings as these most senior cadre' leave office.

OK I admit I lost track of my point for a minute while reviewing the current US Senate. My point is, the USA as a whole is shifting further and further towards the tyranny of the majority ruling the rest of the country. I am personally buffered from this by the fact that my representative in the US House is the seniormost member and my senior Senator is currently #9 in the senate, however states like VA have a moderate population and low seniority Senators so they have little influence in national pollitics. This over ballance towards the majority poulation states is leading to a feeling of disenfranchisement, when people know their vote is meaningless they become frustrated with the situation.

My solution? Simple, abolish the House of Representatives and go to strict regional representation. That gets rid of the Tyranny of the Majority in one shot :D

Of course it puts in the Tyranny of the Seniority, but we havn't tried that and the current system is clearly not working well. How about some change? Real fundamental change, not something cosmetic.

[wisconsin_cur]

Or push back on the issue of state's rights so that the Federal Government takes less; gives less; does less. We can do that within the current framework (you could easily be construed as a domestic enemy of the constitution which members of the armed forces are sworn to defend) and there is some case law (old and discounted at this point but it is there nonetheless) to support a limited federal government.

One does not have to change the constitution but merely re-emphasize some original ideas that have fallen out of vogue the last 70-130 years

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wisconsin_cur', 'O')r push back on the issue of state's rights so that the Federal Government takes less; gives less; does less. We can do that within the current framework (you could easily be construed as a domestic enemy of the constitution which members of the armed forces are sworn to defend) and there is some case law (old and discounted at this point but it is there nonetheless) to support a limited federal government.

One does not have to change the constitution but merely re-emphasize some original ideas that have fallen out of vogue the last 70-130 years

[wisconsin_cur]

If the people do not continually stand up to preserve there rights they will be lost in any system that you construct.

If we re-establish the balance of power between state and federal government than there are institutions that can try to balance one another. Destroying a system and then trying to manage the re-building is a lot harder in practice than the joy it brings in theory.

See the Bush Administration and Iraq.

[Ludi]

Which rights of the minorities do you think the majority is currently working to eliminate?

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'W')hich rights of the minorities do you think the majority is currently working to eliminate?

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wisconsin_cur', 'I')f the people do not continually stand up to preserve there rights they will be lost in any system that you construct.

If we re-establish the balance of power between state and federal government than there are institutions that can try to balance one another. Destroying a system and then trying to manage the re-building is a lot harder in practice than the joy it brings in theory.

See the Bush Administration and Iraq.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '
')In this case I mean the minority pollitical opinion, and also in this case the majority wants to eliminate all of them.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '
')In this case I mean the minority pollitical opinion, and also in this case the majority wants to eliminate all of them.

[jupiters_release]

Sounds fancy but too bad nothing in this thread has f*** all to do with reality. How many trillions do the banks have to steal in open view before people understand how it's always been.

Tanada, your signature couldn't be further from the truth, there's no difference btwn self interest and common good. You need to learn some comparative religion, quantum physics, or the very least a little ecology.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jupiters_release', 'S')ounds fancy but too bad nothing in this thread has f*** all to do with reality. How many trillions do the banks have to steal in open view before people understand how it's always been.

Tanada, your signature couldn't be further from the truth, there's no difference btwn self interest and common good. You need to learn some comparative religion, quantum physics, or the very least a little ecology.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', ' ')Eliminate the idea that government waste is bad

[jupiters_release]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jupiters_release', 'S')ounds fancy but too bad nothing in this thread has f*** all to do with reality. How many trillions do the banks have to steal in open view before people understand how it's always been.

Tanada, your signature couldn't be further from the truth, there's no difference btwn self interest and common good. You need to learn some comparative religion, quantum physics, or the very least a little ecology.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', ' ')Eliminate the idea that government waste is bad

[Ludi]

So you think those reps aren't representing the opinions of their constituents?

I'm too dense for this topic, I guess.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'S')o you think those reps aren't representing the opinions of their constituents?

I'm too dense for this topic, I guess.