News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Revolution Against the Revolution: Looking Back on Sh... by Spooky23 on Thursday August 16, 2018 @09:30AM (#17774420)
All things being equal that would be great, but things are not equal. There is more than ample evidence that racism and partisan politics would disenfranchise voters and cause more harm than the current "one person, one vote" system. With an exception of the US Senate, which is a nod to the nominal sovereignty of US states, american representatives at all levels represent people, not territory.

I don't know too much about Colorado or Massachusetts, but the issue in New York has nothing to do with voting policy. Our national policy for 50 years has been to sacrifice the overall prosperity of the nation and gut all of the productive sectors. In my father's lifetime, the corridor from Utica to Syracuse to Rochester to Buffalo was an economic powerhouse. Decades of tax and fiscal policy sent industry south and abroad, and turned those places into shadows of their former selves.

Springfield and Holyoke are similar stories in Massachusetts. People out there resent the ever creeping outward Boston metro, but the core of their economy is educating Boston metro kids.

The only reasons that public institutions in these place still function is the tax revenue generated in the big cities.

Re:The Revolution Against the Revolution: Looking Back on Sh... by LeifCarrotson on Thursday August 16, 2018 @10:30AM (#17774891)
> With an exception of the US Senate, which is a nod to the nominal sovereignty of US states, american representatives at all levels represent people, not territory.

The Senate could be seen as a nod to geographic minorities, allowing the few people in, say, Wyoming to have an equal footing with more populous states like New York. Most states have a Senate, it's not just a national thing - unless you think the state Senate is a nod to nominal sovereignty of the counties?

Re:The Revolution Against the Revolution: Looking Back on Sh... by eropple on Thursday August 16, 2018 @10:55AM (#17775126)
Most state senates, as far as I am aware--and while I used to do work in this space I am no expert--are elected by roughly equivalently-populated districts. They're an "upper house" that might be elected on a longer cycle but they're still fairly similar in partitioning (just usually fewer of its members).

Which is fine to me, tbh. Land doesn't need to vote.

Re:The Revolution Against the Revolution: Looking Back on Sh... by Spooky23 on Thursday August 16, 2018 @01:34PM (#17776777)
There is certainly a valid view to see it as a way to represent those interests.

To my knowledge, counties and cities are almost always political subdivisions of the State, so that "nod" to geography isn't justified by that nominal sovereignty.

Usually a state senate is an upper house that has a smaller number of members, and usually has unique "advise and consent" powers over judicial and executive appointments.