Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Redrawn State Lines So That There Are 50 States With Approximately Equal Populations

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:22 AM
Original message
Redrawn State Lines So That There Are 50 States With Approximately Equal Populations
Edited on Mon Feb-01-10 01:32 AM by tekisui
Source: Fakeisthenewreal.org

Electoral College Reform

The electoral college is a time-honored system that, has only broken down three times in over 200 years. However, it's obvious that reforms are needed. The organization of the states should be altered. This Electoral Reform Map redivides the territory of the United States into 50 bodies of equal size. The 2000 Census records a population of 281,421,906 for the United States. The states ranged in population from 493,782 to 33,871,648. In this map, new states have formed, all with equal populations of roughly 5,617,000.





more: http://www.fakeisthenewreal.org/reform/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:24 AM
Original message
I notice you have x'd out Hawaii.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:31 AM
Response to Original message
8. Alaska and Hawaii are part of the states of Olympia and Coronado, respectively.
From link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #8
16. So Hawaii's part time state senators and representatives have to maintain two residences?
That's kind of nuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
1. I'm from the great state of San Joaquin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Me too
Interesting map
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. I say it's about time we got some respect.
Not sure how Hawaii and Alaska feel about being part of Olympia and Coronado, but they'll just have to get over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. Yeah, me too.
Or maybe Willamette. I must be pretty close to the state line. :smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flaneur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:18 AM
Response to Reply #7
24. Viva San Joaquin. We'd make a mightly nice state.
Wine, weed, orchards, farms, mountains, seacoasts. Yeah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #24
30. Yes, all of that, and it is one of the most civilized places on the planet.
I love Northern California! :hippie:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asdjrocky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #24
69. Maybe I could even get one of our Senators to come to my town?
In a fantasy world, this would be so great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lyric Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:27 AM
Response to Original message
3. I'm from Allegheny, but it should be Monongahela.
It's a much more interesting and important river in this area.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1awake Donating Member (852 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #3
22. Very true n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
4. Well, it's interesting, at least.
"Great Smoky" is the best name. Are roots bitter in Idaho? Why don't they call that region "Great Potato".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #4
21. 'In late August of 1805,
Edited on Mon Feb-01-10 01:58 AM by elleng
instead of admiring the flower, Meriwether Lewis saw and tasted the root. Writing in his journal, Lewis described the root as “cilindric and as white as snow throughout, except some small parts of the hard black rind which they had not seperated in the preperation… became perfectly soft by boiling, but had a very bitter taste, which was naucious to my pallate, and transfered them to the Indians who had eat them heartily.” Given this description, Lewis might vigorously endorse the common name of this plant: bitterroot.'

http://www.nps.gov/lecl/naturescience/bitterroot.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
58. I would have gone with "Spudsylvania".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flaneur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
87. Bitterroot mountain range in Montana.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #87
91. Oh, to live on Bitterroot Mountain,
with the Barkers and the colored balloons. You can't be twenty...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsACIBI5NPk
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flaneur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
88. Bitterroot mountain range in Montana.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostInAnomie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
6. Wabash up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:32 AM
Response to Original message
9. Plain of Sticks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
many a good man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
37. Llano Destacado means landlocked plain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #37
73. No it means Plain of Stakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theophilus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #9
60. Staked plains....they were so featureless those exploring them had to
put down stakes in the line of sight to find their way......at least that's what I was told.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
10. If they do that, the counties should be redrawn also
So they all have about the same population and are more aligned with the voting areas. That would make voting districts that are more logical than the current gerrymandered mess that has no relationship with historic or demographic divisions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #10
17. The STATES will have to do that, and lots more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sancho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:37 AM
Response to Original message
11. Ocala? Hell no - name it Disney or nothing!
Can I get an avatar for my signature?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RockaFowler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #11
48. I was thinking the same thing
Why Ocala?? Heck Ocala isn't even the largest city in that region. Okeechobee would be a lot better name. We get the lake and the town all in one that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tommy_Carcetti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #11
53. The Ocala National Forest is beautiful.
A much more apt name for that region than some touristy rodent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
59. The city of Ocala isn't even in the state of Ocala
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #11
63. Ocalastan? Mickeystan? Disneyland? Mouseastan? Ifouristan?
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sancho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #63
79. anything except jebistan!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #11
76. Why not Mickey or Goofy? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:40 AM
Response to Original message
12. LOVE IT!
Edited on Mon Feb-01-10 01:44 AM by elleng
I love maps, even fictional ones! Is The Delta really part of the delta? 'Misery' the only surviving state name! I'm STILL from New York!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. That is something. MO stays, and is nearly the same
shape that it is now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
14. It would even out the representation by Senators also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Right. That was one of the great compromises the founders ended up with.
Little Rhode Island and BIGGO Massachusetts/Virginia/etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. That would be the advantage. Right now we let cows and corn vote.
And apparently cows and corn are big fans of helmet haired fundamentalist whackaloons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinrobot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
19. Every time someone moves, we'd have to redraw the borders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ardent15 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
20. From the SF Bay here. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:17 AM
Response to Original message
23. I like how Missouri has stayed pretty much the same. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Truth2Tell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. And apparently Missouri and New York
are the only states that get to keep their names. Washington looks about the same, but now we have to be Olympia. Crap that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
surrealAmerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #23
47. They are apparently already average.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:25 AM
Response to Original message
25. Works for me.
Let the plains states have their knuckledraggers. Wyoming will no longer get 99 times the Senate representation per capita that California does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_wit_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #25
85. This is such an important problem now, I wonder if there is any fix that has any chance at all of be
enacted. Or do we libs have to take turns living in Wyoming, etc. so the fundies don't control the senate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
27. Man, what have I unleashed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Electric Monk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #27
34. Nice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:36 AM
Response to Original message
28. But tiny, ignorant, rural states are what have made America great!
What would our "democracy" be if North Dakotans didn't have ten times the say of Californians? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
piedmont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
29. Hate it. Alabama gets chopped up and apportioned to 4 other states.
Looks like the same fate for Colorado.
And "The Delta" is only about 1/4 delta.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
31. I am happy to be part of Olympia
I've always thought of Seattle as "Anchorage South" anyway. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:49 AM
Response to Original message
32. LOL...the Bay Area as its OWN state?
California has been split apart...oh no...our sense of unity is gone!

And wow, if the states were this way, then big cities would be their own states, and rural areas would make bigger states.

And what about Washington, DC?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
many a good man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #32
38. California can become three states
I remember hearing a long time ago that when it was admitted to the Union California retained a special right to be able to divide itself into as many as three separate states.

I'm now unable to find any reference to this idea on the internets. Has anybody else ever heard about this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #38
65. Never heard that.
But, Texas still retains the right to split into as many as five states.

Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States

...new States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas and having sufficient population, may, hereafter by the consent of said State, be formed out of the territory thereof,...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 03:00 AM
Response to Original message
33. Whatever shakes 'em up, why not. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 07:00 AM
Response to Original message
35. What is the purpose of this?
After all, it's not like the population of these new states will have been once again redistributed, and there will be winners and losers:shrug: So why bother with an extreme solution like this that is horribly expensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 07:00 AM
Response to Original message
36. What is the purpose of this?
After all, it's not like the population of these new states will have been once again redistributed, and there will be winners and losers:shrug: So why bother with an extreme solution like this that is horribly expensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janet118 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #36
44. It makes the Senate a more representative body . . .
Right now small population states (Idaho, Wyoming, Maine) are over represented and have inordinate power over legislation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #44
49. That's why we have the House, to give states with larger population more power
Sorry if you don't like the solution that our founding fathers came up with, but I think that it is rather ingenious.

It would be prohibitively expensive to make this sort of thing reality, and in the end it wouldn't solve a thing since populations are moving around all the time. What, are you going to redraw state boundaries every ten years after the census is taken?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mechatanketra Donating Member (903 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #49
74. "640 should be enough for anyone"
That's why we have the House, to give states with larger population more power. Sorry if you don't like the solution that our founding fathers came up with, but I think that it is rather ingenious.

The House also gives disproportionate representation to low population states, because we capped the size of the House while still guaranteeing every state 1 representative. Illinois has 23-24 times Wyoming's population, but only 19 representatives. If the current House kept the same population ratio* as our ingenious founding fathers', then Wyoming would actually have 14 reps to Illinois's 349.

* Yes, that would make for a huge legislature. We're a huge country. The government's going to be inefficient no matter what, we've just decided to push that inefficiency towards the "resolution" (inaccurate/unresponsive representation) rather than speed (i.e. dealing with larger quorums and longer rolecalls, votes, and debates).

The Senate solution is primarily "ingenious" from the standpoint of trying to bribe a bunch of pre-existing quasi-nations into becoming a single government — comparable to the provisions to allow slaves to partially count for censuses, and to set a 20-year ban on slave trade regulation. It was a pragmatic solution to a problem 200+ years ago; the problem it solved is moot, and now the "solution" is a problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #44
75. Idaho isn't small.
It's enormous. It just doesn't have a high population density.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #36
54. You're aware that we do this every 10 years (or so!) with the House, no?
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 07:54 AM
Response to Original message
39. Southern New England, huh?
We must have a lot of people in this area, because that state still is not that big. I know just by the terrible traffic we have here in CT...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
40. North Coaster here.
No worries about who we'd be for. Our whole area has been traditionally democratic since the 90s.

The territory below us should be carried by Cincinnati, Dayton, Athens and Columbus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
41. fantasy politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Obamanaut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:23 AM
Response to Original message
42. Here you go from a DUer post last week, with more responses in the thread
Edited on Mon Feb-01-10 08:27 AM by Obamanaut
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiny elvis Donating Member (619 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
43. does the cartographer disdain native american names?
do you want to change from a majority of states with names derived from the natives to almost none?
will hawaiians ever stop calling themselves such?
i like okefenokee, though
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Retrograde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #43
80. quite a few Native American names
Willamette, Mojave, Pecos (maybe), Missouri, Chicago, Wabash, Tombigbee, Okefenokee, Erie, Allegheny, Susquehanna, Chesapeake, Potomac, Pamlico. What I want to know is where Brownia comes from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JesterCS Donating Member (627 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
45. GOD STILL IN SW OHIO. i cant escape!!! n/t lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arendt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
46. This has been my personal issue for over 10 years...
Proposals such as the above have been made for over thirty years.

But, such proposals are only PART OF the solution. Please, please, see my under-visited website:

http://www.poly-ticker.org/index.php?title=Boundaries_of_states

Thanks

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
50. How often would the lines be redrawn? Our population is quite mobile.
Perhaps we could leave the state lines as is and distribute something like "federal districts" to each state based on population.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #50
55. Every 10 years (sound familiar?) nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
51. hoo-ray for Willamette!-- although I'd prefer the name "Jefferson..."
...since a big chunk of that is already the erstwhile state of Jefferson: http://www.jeffersonstate.com/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
52. We've never had states of equal population.
Even when the Senate was established, the states were unequal. It makes the country moderate. And while I'm sure that I'd prefer a country that's extremist in the same ways I am--at least for a year or two--I doubt others would.

The entire US government is set up with checks and balances. Three branches, any two of which is generally enough to quell the third. Two houses, keeping each other in check. States that formerly to a greater extent, but still to a significant extent keep the federal government in check, and a federal government to keep the states in check. It's a neat system. Dysfunctional, when the group making the judgment can't call all the shots. But otherwise surprisingly durable and effective, at least when the population isn't itself dysfunctional.

If you think the government's not able to work well because of gridlock, just consider that to a very large extent it reflects the population. When you see those with (D) and (R) unable to talk and cooperate, remember that those people are put in power by people who vote for them. Their dysfunctional is the populace's dysfunction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #52
56. "We've never had suffrage for women." nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill McBlueState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #52
67. When the nation was founded
the largest state was about ten times as populous as the smallest.

Now, the largest state is more than 100 times as populous as the smallest.

You can imagine how someone might think the composition of the Senate was an excusable compromise then, and unacceptably unfair now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_wit_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #67
86. Unforgivably unacceptable now. Unacceptably unforgivable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Yes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
57. Woohoo I still live in Chicago! =) .. this is rather intriguing.
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chisox08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #57
81. Same here!
Does that make Mayor Daley, Gov. Daley?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeff In Milwaukee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
61. Free da UP, eh?
Still part of Michigan...arg!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
62. Proof that there are people with clearly too much time on their hands.. no thanks!
:P

Doug D.
Ocalastan (formerly part of Florida..)

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
64. While funny and entertaining.. this is the kind of thing the freepers use against us with voters
to make us out to be radicals. Not good. Disapprove of it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #64
77. Radical?
:rofl:

The freepers might distrust it, because it shows us to be numerate. Yeah, that's radical for a freeper; but I think that freepers are not going to be able to say "oooh, look, 'voters', there's a Democrat-supporting website that linked to another one that showed 50 equal population states! Be very, very afraid!!!!!" with any success.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ddeclue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
66. Oh and Atlantastan being its own state.. the people of Georgia outside of Atlanta
have been accusing Atlantans of that for decades.. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
68. These seem to make some sense...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ContraBass Black Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
70. The borders cannot be redrawn as quickly as population migrates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RushIsRot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
71. I hope this will cause Brownia to turn more blue-ia. But I doubt it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spike89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
72. Regional interests lose out
By making the entire congress representational, we'd lose the balance that is already strained between the interests of the heavily populated eastern seaboard and the much less densely populated midwest and western states. The reality is that for many critical issues, regional states tend to vote together to protect their interests. From nuclear waste storage, to water rights, to mining and forestry discussions, population-only politics would be regionally unfair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_wit_it Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #72
89. ...to gay rights, to war-mongering, to rejection of gun laws, to anti-environmentalists, to...
basically any non-reich-wing cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OllieLotte Donating Member (495 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
78. Perfect...now nobody move. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #78
83. lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thothmes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
82. Might not be a bad idea, all one needs to do is
amend article IV section 2 of the Constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-01-10 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
84. So Northwest Arkansas is part of Brownia?
Brownia? Where the heck did they get that name from? John Brown, of Pottowatomie Creek (Kansas) Massacre fame?
A more appropriate name for that area would be "Wal-Martistan".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shintao Donating Member (288 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
90. Make Mine a Grid
I would like a checker board of equal square miles per fifty states, border lines running East to West and North to South.

I am not concerned with Electorial reform, but with an advancement of the way we look at America from a technological view. Might just assign states numbers while we are at it.


NOTE: Who decided what was the "top" of the World, and the "down-under?" Couldn't it have just as easily been the opposite?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #90
92. At a guess, it's because northern hemisphere navigators used Polaris
It's 50:50 whether you regard the north or south pole of a compass as the 'pointing' bit; but with the stars in your hemisphere, you find your pole star as the one fixed star. So, if you're then facing north, it's natural to want to look down at the chart or map in front of you and have north at teh top of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
93. It hasn't "broken down" at any point in its history
Edited on Tue Feb-02-10 09:29 AM by slackmaster
On the three occasions on which the EC vote conflicted with and overrode popular vote, it did exactly what it was intended to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC