[thinkingtoilet]

Not at all. I can feel very strongly about that, but if I feel more strongly about health care so tens of thousands of people don't die needlessly and countless millions more don't go bankrupt or get maimed from lack treatment, one is going to win over the other. That doesn't mean I don't feel strongly about it. Also, the 600,000 in Wyoming get the same two senators as the 40,000,000 people in California so it's not like there is equal representation by any means.

[airstrike]

Like I said, not enough people care about it enough to push for legislation.

And proportional representation is found in the House of Representatives. We have a bicameral legislature.

[kennywinker]

> not enough people care about it enough to push for legislation.

This is a just-so-story. No matter how much people care you can always say they don’t care enough when the law doesn’t match what people want - and when the law does match it’s because they cared enough, no matter how much they actually cared.

In practice, the laws don’t match what people want.

But all that aside - the laws already exist to block this acquisition, the only thing that’s missing is enforcement.

[anjel]

The Constitution simply states that representation shall be based on population but doesn't specify a fixed cap. The number of Reps in the House was frozen by the Congressional apportionment Act of 1929.

How is that proportional, a century of pop growth later?