• Valmond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    What I have understood as a non American, the state would still have the same voting power though? So -75% of people, leaving just angry men I guess.

    • Shiggles@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sorta, but that’s not the whole story. We have two legislative bodies, the House of Representatives and the Senate. In the senate, every state gets two senators. In the house, every state gets at least two representatives, plus some amount based on population - california has 52, for instance.

      The original idea was to “make sure rural voices were heard”. In practice, it very much has been what you stated - if you’re educated but not rich enough to benefit from republican policies, you flee red states en masse, leaving mostly rich assholes and uneducated chucklefucks who are hurt most by the very people they elect. They then have a massively disproportionate effect on policy versus any joe schmoe in california.

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The problem is moving isn’t free and there aren’t good jobs in rural areas, meaning… Move with what money?