denominator wrote:He's not a conservative complaining about the liberals or a liberal complaining about the conservatives - he's complaining about the system. I find it absurd that both Canada and the USA haven't adopted a rep-by-pop or similar system, but then again, the people making the decisions are the ones that would benefit the least from such a change.
Well I can't speak for Canada, but the US system on the Federal Level has fallen to the "status quo" system. The numbers completely collapse at the Federal level. We have 235 million voters and 435 members of the House of Representatives.
Now consider the UK, there is a rough voting age population of 49 million and 650 members in the House of Commons.
Think about that, equal distribution has one member of the HoR for every 540 thousand voters and one member of the HoC for every 75 thousand voters.
One of these things is not like the other ...
Or the EU with 375 million eligible voters and 751 members which places it at one rep per 500 voters.
On the other hand, the HoR is a true legislative body, while the EP has very little powers, legislatively speaking.
So there is absolutely nothing you can do to the US to make it better with the numbers we currently have. If you want to have the same representation in the US as there is in the UK you need over three thousand members in the House. Is that wacky? Well the Galactic Empire only had 1024 voting members and that was batshit crazy. Even then every representative has to represent over 200 thousand people.
(AS I ALWAYS SAY, YOU CAN"T COMPARE THE US TO OTHER NATIONS - BUT TO BODIES LIKE THE EU)
The alternative is to so constrain the Federal Government and leave the real decision making to the smaller state level bodies where there are better levels of representation. You might even redistrict the states for more proportional balances (this has actually been proposed). But the Federal Government is at this point too big to succeed.