[syki]

I have not painted anyone as evil. I suggest you reread what I wrote and take it at face value. It appears to me that you are projecting and making some assumptions about my views that aren’t supported by anything that I wrote. My post is about imbalances in the present system. It is my view and contention that the current federal system for apportioning senators and representatives is not sustainable. Everyone is free to advocate/fight for what they believe. I’ve not suggested otherwise. A system in which a minority viewpoint regularly impedes the legislative spending agenda of the majority is not sustainable long term. There is a power imbalance. The problem of this imbalance will exacerbate largely along rural/urban lines until something gives.

[garmaine]

You made an automatic assumption that this bill is in the best interests of the masses. That may not be the case.

[syki]

I made no such assumption. I don’t know anything about the bill and don’t care if it is in the best interests of the masses. I do care about the majority of the electorate having their votes count for something with regard to public policy (provided said policy does not violate Constitutional rights). It’s best to read what I wrote without trying to guess my feelings on things I’ve not talked about.

[senectus1]

yeah I read it that way, I'm not sure why these two posters are twisting your words/intentions.

[garmaine]

It’s a fair interpretation. A representative’s job is to represent his constituents, not to pass bills on party lines written by oligarchs. The allocation of R/D senators doesn’t factor into this. “What is best for the people of West Virginia?” is the only question he should be considering.