good reason for "states" as entities to have any power at all in electing a president. One person, one vote, the person that gets the most votes wins.

My solution to the DC question is to make DC residents citizens of Maryland and reapportion the House as needed. I would not give DC two senators.

There should be some way to prevent strict 51% can do anything they want kind of rule, but the idea that 20% can keep anything from happening is absurd. Let's go back to the distribution of power in the senate as it was at the founding. In 1790 Pennsylvania (most populous state) had 7.8 times the number of people as Georgia (the least). Today California has just under 70 times the population of Wyoming yet those two states have the same representation in the Senate also the same vote should the house decide an election. That's ludicrous. So maybe the ideal solution is to keep the senate and the filibuster but give California 20 Senators so they have the same relative weight as they did when the constitution was signed. In that way the vote of a citizen of California counts as 1/7.8 as that of a citizen of Wyoming. Isn't that enough of a weighting?

Something else that is different today is the willingness of people to burn the place down to get their way. The Founders, famously, had their disagreements but if Mitch McConnell and Ted Cruz were on opposite sides of constitutional convention we would still be under the Articles of Confederation.






[Post edited by 81_Hokie at 09/21/2020 1:23PM]