General Discussion

Orangepeel

(13,970 posts)

7. No. But increasing the number of house reps is

Reply to in2herbs (Original post)

Sat May 7, 2022, 11:30 PM

May 2022

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

IS ADDING MORE SENATORS A SOLUTION WORTH CONSIDERING? [View all] in2herbs May 2022 OP

How so without a Constitutional Amendment? Polybius May 2022 #1

Is a Constitutional Amendment required to split a State? PufPuf23 May 2022 #14

Under this scenario, no state(s) is added and no Constitutional amendment is in2herbs May 2022 #18

Statehood for Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia would add more Senators. n/t TygrBright May 2022 #2

Is P. R. on board with this? Of course, I'd support the idea wholeheartedly. InAbLuEsTaTe May 2022 #5

Polling seems to indicate a pretty even split. AnyFunctioningAdult May 2022 #41

Yeah, not sure then bout PR...DC fo sho tho. I say ram it thru then & federalize abortion rights. InAbLuEsTaTe May 2022 #42

Who knows what we can do long-term, but we better get out vote in Nov and 2024. Hoyt May 2022 #3

That is where we have to start...without winning the midterm, nothing can be done. Demsrule86 May 2022 #8

People say this GOTV as if its the solution. The states are so gerrymandered that in2herbs May 2022 #19

The laws aren't going to change between now and November. GOTV. Hoyt May 2022 #26

The composition of the Senate is given in Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution. former9thward May 2022 #4

The article and pdf cites reasons why this is not cast in stone. nt in2herbs May 2022 #20

Yes, and the article is wrong. former9thward May 2022 #40

Requires 38 states and 2/3 of the House and Senate to ratify such an amendment. roamer65 May 2022 #6

So do nothing?? With majority Ds in the senate this couldl be passed just like any in2herbs May 2022 #22

No. But increasing the number of house reps is Orangepeel May 2022 #7

The article spends a lot of words sarisataka May 2022 #9

Exactly Novara May 2022 #16

Of course I can imagine how much we could get done with a clear Senate majority, but in2herbs May 2022 #23

Gerrymandering has nothing to do with the Senate. Jedi Guy May 2022 #34

How do you gerrymand a state? hardluck May 2022 #35

The whole premise of gerrymandering collapses on the fact that the Senate MarineCombatEngineer May 2022 #43

All of these things require support from people that want to take away rights JI7 May 2022 #10

It would be easier to reset the number of Representatives because that's governed by a law jmowreader May 2022 #11

Good idea -- approach the issue via House of Reps. nt in2herbs May 2022 #24

The red states might go for it, too jmowreader May 2022 #46

Not necessarily. mwooldri May 2022 #12

this is a bizarre fantasy. it basically imagines a very left-wing supreme court radically unblock May 2022 #13

You'd have to be more specific in your reasoning for there to be a response. nt in2herbs May 2022 #29

The paper imagines a Supreme Court completely unlike recent ones muriel_volestrangler May 2022 #44

Thank you. Better explanation than mine. unblock May 2022 #47

It is interesting that California has about 40 million people and only two Senators... kentuck May 2022 #15

California-2 Senators sarisataka May 2022 #17

Why not two states of California - North California and South California? kentuck May 2022 #21

The Dakotas were admitted as two states sarisataka May 2022 #27

I'm not in favor of that but even if it was done I don't see the increase equaling in2herbs May 2022 #28

This message was self-deleted by its author LiberatedUSA May 2022 #30

It's obviously not. And the Atlantic article put for a solution, a solution that does not in2herbs May 2022 #25

... Crepuscular May 2022 #37

Just to be clear, slavery had a lot to do with that structure unblock May 2022 #48

If republicans... LiberatedUSA May 2022 #31

Senators would be added but the voters would be the deciders as to whether they would in2herbs May 2022 #32

The article makes the argument sarisataka May 2022 #36

We haven't made a new state since I was a kid in 1959. Emile May 2022 #33

multiple Dems are against adding more states and/or also adding more SCOTUS justices so none of this Celerity May 2022 #38

Why? Emile May 2022 #39

because they're institutionalists for the most part, and we'd have to do a filibuster carveout Celerity May 2022 #45