[CornFed]

[quote author=CornFed link=topic=14611.msg156717#msg156717 date=1455728855]
I do think that they consciously avoided the possibility of states with concentrations of population running roughshod over the interests of the less-populated states.  Isn't that why they came up with the Electoral College?  Any effort to undermine the role of the Electoral College will result in greater majority rule, which is presumably a good thing, but it will threaten the minority's rights.  They scrupulously tried to avoid that.  It's also the reason they developed a bicameral Congress with one body based on equal state representation and the other based on population.

I was talking about districting in the House, which is supposed to be the representative body.  But thanks to gerrymandering and the coincidence that Democrats tend to live in densely populated areas, the House no longer reflects voters' preferences.  That has nothing to do with the senate or electoral college.

Also, you fail to appreciate the distinction (pointed out by WIM above) between not trampling on a minority and elevating a minority to power.  The latter was surely not what the founders intended.

More generally, arguing that the system is just because the founders wanted it that way is not useful.  They were just people, often forced to make bad compromises to patch together a new country from 13 colonies.  It is not a coincidence that since 1789, very few other countries have followed the US example in developing their constitutions, and most that did so foundered.
[/quote]

The inroads that the GOP has made in both houses of Congress and in the state legislatures over the last 10 years did not start with them holding the power to gerrymander in those states that were flipped from Democrat to Republican control.  Gerrymandering has strengthened their control (presumably) since they were flipped, but it certainly didn't cause the flip.

Arguing to retain the current structure because it is old would be stupid (which I am most certainly NOT doing).  It is also fairly naive or glib to argue that those who want to overhaul the structure now are somehow more than human.  It is risible to assert that politicians today have anything remotely like the vision of those individuals who fought for their interests in crafting the original Constitution.

I am interested in your comment about other countries that have tried our form of government and failed.  Which would those be?  The fact that our system of government is unique only serves to highlight its power, since the success of our form of government has, in fact, been unique in the world.

[CornFed]

[quote author=CornFed link=topic=14611.msg156717#msg156717 date=1455728855]
I do think that they consciously avoided the possibility of states with concentrations of population running roughshod over the interests of the less-populated states.  Isn't that why they came up with the Electoral College?  Any effort to undermine the role of the Electoral College will result in greater majority rule, which is presumably a good thing, but it will threaten the minority's rights.  They scrupulously tried to avoid that.  It's also the reason they developed a bicameral Congress with one body based on equal state representation and the other based on population.

I was talking about districting in the House, which is supposed to be the representative body.  But thanks to gerrymandering and the coincidence that Democrats tend to live in densely populated areas, the House no longer reflects voters' preferences.  That has nothing to do with the senate or electoral college.

Also, you fail to appreciate the distinction (pointed out by WIM above) between not trampling on a minority and elevating a minority to power.  The latter was surely not what the founders intended.

More generally, arguing that the system is just because the founders wanted it that way is not useful.  They were just people, often forced to make bad compromises to patch together a new country from 13 colonies.  It is not a coincidence that since 1789, very few other countries have followed the US example in developing their constitutions, and most that did so foundered.
[/quote]

The inroads that the GOP has made in both houses of Congress and in the state legislatures over the last 10 years did not start with them holding the power to gerrymander in those states that were flipped from Democrat to Republican control.  Gerrymandering has strengthened their control (presumably) since they were flipped, but it certainly didn't cause the flip.

Arguing to retain the current structure because it is old would be stupid (which I am most certainly NOT doing).  It is also fairly naive or glib to argue that those who want to overhaul the structure now are somehow more than human.  It is risible to assert that politicians today have anything remotely like the vision of those individuals who fought for their interests in crafting the original Constitution.

I am interested in your comment about other countries that have tried our form of government and failed.  Which would those be?  The fact that our system of government is unique only serves to highlight its power, since the success of our form of government has, in fact, been unique in the world.