03-11-2021, 08:06 PM
(03-11-2021, 07:57 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: When an independent city has more people than at least two states, and then that city becomes a state itself, I fail to see the logic of an argument that their power would be outsized. If that many people are not worthy of that representation, then the next logical step would be for Wyoming and Vermont to be absorbed by neighboring states because them having that level of federal representation would be outsized power. If we're setting minimum requirements for states then we should start applying them universally.
Again, not an argument against absorption into an exiting state. No one has advanced why creating a new state for one city is in any way preferable to having that city incorporated into another, pre-existing, state. Unless you're a Democrat and want the two automatic Senators that a voting population that votes ~90% Democrat. Which is also a heavy argument for why absorption into an already deep blue state would not "dilute" anything.
It's interesting that, recently, when Democrats don't get what they want they seek to change the rules. Don't like two POTUS elections, let's get rid of the Electoral College! Don't like the SCOTUS make up, let's add more justices that we can appoint! Don't like the Senate working as designed, let's add more states from heavily blue areas! It's not a good look.
It's so blatantly obvious that I doubt many people are blind to it.
