I really wasn’t think of this in a partisan manner, but rather the original discussion that took place when determining the members of Congress by our framers.
The Senate has limited seats for exactly this reason, equal representation of the State governance, yet larger populations need larger voices, thus the system of differing rep. amounts based on population. Congress wouldn’t be split into two otherwise.
With that in mind, the system wasn’t built to favor equality accross political identities, but rather equal representation per the amount of people living.
I live in a rural area, I’ve lived in an urban area. Here in a rural area I am actually able to communicate with my county rep. In a larger city such communication was impossible. Technically, in my state only half of us are represented per the citizen to representative ratio (3mil population in 1920 → 6mil modern population).
If Missouri, Montana, or New Mexico want a larger voice in the House, they need larger populations. This is a key function of our representative democracy.
The Senate used to be representative of State values. Today, with the popularity and use of political organization of parties, Senators function as further representation of party values. If we want to continue to the general election of Senators, than their affiliation with political parties needs to end if we want them to be representative of State interests.
Unfortunately yes, cities would get more representation → because there are more people. If there was a group of 10, and 3 wanted change, should the other 7 have to adhere to a minority?
These values are direct foundations of our ‘constitutional representative democracy’. Representatives that vote in the better interest of the majority while adhereing to a set of constitutional guidelines. Majority systems can be scary sometimes, Socrates is a great example of why, so I understand the thought process.
I agree with you, but I think the values of proper citizen to rep. ratios outway the advantage that the current system awards to rural areas.
I will give way and say there are multiple avenues to take, and I am no judge of what is the absolute best for society. But, the struction of population representation vs. state representation is a prime example of the local vs. federal functionality of our government that has begun to be subverted.