tmyakal

  • 2 Posts
  • 114 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle
  • I keep saying it: they need to abolish the size limit of the House. It’s been frozen for 100 years while the US population has exploded. The result has been less representation for urban areas and more for rural, both in Congress and when deciding president via the electoral college. You actually normalize it so everyone’s voice is heard equally? Congressional gridlock goes away. “Stolen” elections go away.












  • tmyakaltoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldFacts For Thee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    For real. Any gun I could obtain as a private citizen is not going to stand up to the weight of the police, let alone the US military if a true authoritarian regime took over. My right to a hunting rifle doesn’t matter when they have tanks and drones.


  • The bigger problem is that the number of seats in the House has been frozen for about a hundred years. Our population exploded, but our number of representatives stayed static, so places with the most people actually get less representation in congress.

    On top of this, the number of electors a state has its equal to the number of representatives that state has in the Senate and the House combined. So more populated states also get underrepresented in the presidential election.

    The Three-Fifths Compromise was absolutely fucked, but it’s not what is deadlocking the House now and its not what is letting a people lose the popular vote and still go on to be president in 21st century elections.


  • The real problem is that the size of the House of Representatives has been frozen for 100 years. The number of electoral college votes a state has is equal to the number of reps and senators they have. Since the House hasn’t grown alongside our population, the relative representation for rural areas has steadily grown more and more.

    Ending the cap on the House would balance out the electoral college issues and help reduce the constant congressional deadlocks we’re seeing.



  • tmyakaltofedia shitpost@fedia.ioan honor
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    28 days ago

    The judicial system can get plenty accomplished without juries. In fact, the number of disputes settled by jury trial has dropped drastically in the last fifty years, especially with the Supreme Court ruling on Brady v. the United States in 1970 that upheld plea bargaining.

    The result has been a stronger judiciary that more readily upholds state authority. Instead of a prosecutor proving to a dozen other citizens that you are guilty, a prosecutor needs to persuade you alone that, whether you’re guilty or not, you’ll suffer more if you don’t admit guilt than if you do. That’s a fucked up premise, IMO.