We are all Slave now.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

I am so heartened to see that blue states have now embraced the 10th Amendment:

http://www.governing.com/topics/fina...it-states.html

The 10th Amendment has been well known to liberals for a long time. It was argued in some of the cases looking to overturn the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act", for example.

I suspect that argument is a loser in most courts - the argument that the 10th amendment cases on taxation from the 19th century survive the passage of the 16th amendment strikes me as very difficult - but I'm betting they're leading with it to test whether this particular court might want to find some case to expand 10th amendment jurisprudence. The better argument strikes me as the Equal Protection one, but obviously Equal Protection arguments are, shall we say, disfavored right now.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

I am so heartened to see that blue states have now embraced the 10th Amendment:

http://www.governing.com/topics/fina...it-states.html

That suit doesn't sound like a winner.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

That suit doesn't sound like a winner.

Loser - http://reason.com/volokh/2018/07/19/...ous-lawsuit-ag
20 Red States lawsuit also loser - https://reason.com/volokh/2018/02/28...itutional-case

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

I am looking forward to the video of an unhinged Donald Trump screaming into the camera about Michael Cohen: "I THOUGHT THE BITCH WAS WHITE"

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I am looking forward to the video of an unhinged Donald Trump screaming into the camera about Michael Cohen: "I THOUGHT THE BITCH WAS WHITE"

I have never been so happy that Twitter's default is no sound for videos embedded in my feed.

[Oliver_Wendell_Ramone]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Loser - http://reason.com/volokh/2018/07/19/...ous-lawsuit-ag
20 Red States lawsuit also loser - https://reason.com/volokh/2018/02/28...itutional-case

Hey Less, you going to the 40th anniversary Fear show in SF? They're in Portland in August; I have no idea if Fear is a good idea after 40 years. But hey, more beer!

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Oliver_Wendell_Ramone

Hey Less, you going to the 40th anniversary Fear show in SF? They're in Portland in August; I have no idea if Fear is a good idea after 40 years. But hey, more beer!

They are playing at Slim's, which is 2 blocks from where I live, but I am in Vegas next weekend and cannot go. Otherwise, I would be having a beer with Fear.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

They are playing at Slim's, which is 2 blocks from where I live, but I am in Vegas next weekend and cannot go. Otherwise, I would be having a beer with Fear.

Seems like I was just there last week.

[ferrets_bueller]

Good morning, fellow (mostly) urban sophisticates.



The Washington Post recently published an article with some deeply, deeply disturbing demographics. By the year 2040....roll this around and think about somebody like President Mike Huckleberry....30 percent of the population of the country will control 68 percent of the seats in the U.S. Senate. Or, more starkly, half the population of the country will control 84 percent of those seats. The other half, with the major urban centers, with have 16 percent of the Senate seats. The graphics are very good.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.bd87f7c1c09d


The Senate becomes a barrier to anything remotely progressive.


Enjoy your day!

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ferrets_bueller

Good morning, fellow (mostly) urban sophisticates.



The Washington Post recently published an article with some deeply, deeply disturbing demographics. By the year 2040....roll this around and think about somebody like President Mike Huckleberry....30 percent of the population of the country will control 68 percent of the seats in the U.S. Senate. Or, more starkly, half the population of the country will control 84 percent of those seats. The other half, with the major urban centers, with have 16 percent of the Senate seats. The graphics are very good.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.bd87f7c1c09d


The Senate becomes a barrier to anything remotely progressive.


Enjoy your day!

Of course the senate is unrepresentative - it was set up to be. But some of the low population states are actually very urban (like Rhode Island, Maryland, Nevada, and Hawaii), they just have a small big city at their core. There are some like Connecticut that are suburbs and the suburbs to those suburbs. There are even a few liberal but truly rural states (start with Vermont...). And the big states include Texas, which is pretty conservative.

But, hell, I'm going to have to retire to some tiny rural swing state - maybe Montana. Montana is nice. Who wants to join me.

And we really have to make Puerto Rico a state after the Hurricane debacle.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ferrets_bueller

Good morning, fellow (mostly) urban sophisticates.



The Washington Post recently published an article with some deeply, deeply disturbing demographics. By the year 2040....roll this around and think about somebody like President Mike Huckleberry....30 percent of the population of the country will control 68 percent of the seats in the U.S. Senate. Or, more starkly, half the population of the country will control 84 percent of those seats. The other half, with the major urban centers, with have 16 percent of the Senate seats. The graphics are very good.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.bd87f7c1c09d


The Senate becomes a barrier to anything remotely progressive.


Enjoy your day!

I trust a good bit of this will be fixed by envy and some political "keeping up with the Joneses." As certain states enact progressive policies, they will attract people from other states and cause people in less progressive states to demand progressive policies.

As they have globally, borders of states will also matter less.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Of course the senate is unrepresentative - it was set up to be. But some of the low population states are actually very urban (like Rhode Island, Maryland, Nevada, and Hawaii), they just have a small big city at their core. There are some like Connecticut that are suburbs and the suburbs to those suburbs. There are even a few liberal but truly rural states (start with Vermont...). And the big states include Texas, which is pretty conservative.

But, hell, I'm going to have to retire to some tiny rural swing state - maybe Montana. Montana is nice. Who wants to join me.

And we really have to make Puerto Rico a state after the Hurricane debacle.

Mi has 2 Dem senators. Mass I assume usually does, lots of the other smaller states are Dem enough. The senate will flip flop, and as the population shifts actually remain more as a hedge against 8 states controlling everything.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Mi has 2 Dem senators. Mass I assume usually does, lots of the other smaller states are Dem enough. The senate will flip flop, and as the population shifts actually remain more as a hedge against 8 states controlling everything.

I have to keep reminding myself why exactly we worry about having most of the people control stuff; usually it's to protect unpopular minorities or the like, but that doesn't seem to be what this is about.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I have to keep reminding myself why exactly we worry about having most of the people control stuff; usually it's to protect unpopular minorities or the like, but that doesn't seem to be what this is about.

Because Michigan has different priorities than NY or Cali and we don't want them to be able to steam roller us? Now multiply that concern by 10 for the actually small states.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Because Michigan has different priorities than NY or Cali and we don't want them to be able to steam roller us? Now multiply that concern by 10 for the actually small states.

Do you think the differences between Detroit and Buffalo are bigger than the differences between Oneonta or Cadillac and either one of the big cities?

If we ever made Senators more representative, you might well end up with 3-6 Senators for top 10 states like both Michigan and New York, while middling states like Massachusetts and South Carolina would stick with 2 and small states like Vermont or Wyoming would have to get 1. Some states might even choose to elect them by district instead of Statewide, so you'd get representation of places within big states that really don't matter much today.