The House remaining at 435 members for over a century is a bigger problem. The US was built on the concept that the interests of both individuals AND states should be represented at the Federal level. Obviously done by loosely tying House members to the population, Senate members to states, and the Presidency to a combination of both. Except the power of the population in smaller states is heavily skewed because the number of House members has remained fixed at 435 and because electoral votes are varied based on number of Representatives and not Senators. This results in the issue you're describing more than Senate representation.
If you adjust the number of House members upwards, then electoral votes will more closely align with popular vote.
42
u/TheTVDB May 27 '23
The House remaining at 435 members for over a century is a bigger problem. The US was built on the concept that the interests of both individuals AND states should be represented at the Federal level. Obviously done by loosely tying House members to the population, Senate members to states, and the Presidency to a combination of both. Except the power of the population in smaller states is heavily skewed because the number of House members has remained fixed at 435 and because electoral votes are varied based on number of Representatives and not Senators. This results in the issue you're describing more than Senate representation.
If you adjust the number of House members upwards, then electoral votes will more closely align with popular vote.