It was one of the hallmarks of the progressive era. It is a breakdown because it gave the Federal government more power than what the original framers intended. Just because something changed doesn't mean it's for the better. Ask Coke how that change worked for them.
The only intentions of the original framers that are relevant are the words that they put in the constitution. The con of original-ism just means "I'll pick some quotes I like from a select few of the framers in order to justify the position I want."
That's a bit general. You could also say the con of progressivism just means, "I'll pick some quotes I don't like from a select few of the framers in order to justify the position I want."
Gerrymandered state legislatures are there to serve the purpose of the State. They aren't there to serve there own purpose. Look at what we have now, senators who's primary responsibility is to be re-elected instead of doing what's needed for the welfare of the State.
That pricapal doesn't change just because time has passed. City life has very little in common with rural life. City people share little values with rural people. Why would any small state want to remain in the Union if every decision was from the viewpoint of LA, NYC, Chicago, etc.? You think heavily populated areas care about smaller, rural farms? Or the burdens things like illegal immigration puts on smaller towns resources?
That's nonsensical. Progressives don't primarily justify their positions with quotes from framers. Originalists do by definition.
Ah, so you believe undemocratically elected officials better represent the state than the people. I don't agree.
I didn't say they change because time has passed. I said it has little value today.
You can say that about any number of groups. What's the justification today? "Rural people and city people share little values, so rural people should have more power." How is that a rational conclusion? Should we give communists more power because they share little values with capitalists?
The problem is that capitalism has been in ICU tied to a life support machine since around early 2000's. This is an absolutely objective reality and whether you think you should give capitalism more power is irrelevant at this stage.
Well, concentrating all the votes to large cities is exactly that. 😂
No, it's not. Giving everyone equal power is not the same as giving individuals in less populated states more power.
If I snatched your child's phone, went through the pictures on it, and then claimed that just wanted to make sure that there was no child porn on it: Would you believe me? Or would you think that I was some creep who liked spying on children?
