The political science theory was that states were independent sovereign entities forming a loose coalition for protection and monetary policy. If 1 person = 1 vote, the less populace sovereign entities would lose it's self determination to places like PA or Virginia. It was created purely for the States Rights crowd.From a political science perspective, has the theory of why the founding fathers agreed on the Connecticut Compromise (what led to the House being population driven and the Senate being bicarmel) really changed since 1787?
of course those in the majority will support rule by majority and those in the minority would support equal representation
if conservatives were the majority in the country, would you continue to support that? idk
Unfortunately for Libertarians, the Union winning the Civil War and the resulting need for Federal action to protect recently freed persons pretty well squashed the idea that each State held any measurable power over themselves when considered part of the whole. So the need for Senators to protect their State's sovereign rights hasn't really existed for the last 150 years. They may vote in a way so as to win state wide election, but the only difference between a House seat or a Senate seat is the amount of people included in the vote, not in some high ideal of State's rights.
Clearly I was grasping at straws to figure out what the hell he was getting at. So what Democrat policies are designed to keep women single?
