Should all the US state legislatures be unicameral?

[greenforest32]

Our federal system of government is the justification for the US Senate but the state governments are unitary.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1964 in Reynolds v. Sims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_v._Sims) that state legislative districts (both lower and upper chambers) must have equal population (all house districts must have the same number of people and all senate districts must have the same number of people).

Problem is that just means that now you have two chambers based on population. That's pointless. Here in Oregon it's a joke. Our state legislature has 90 seats (60 house, 30 senate). Guess what our senate seats are? Two house districts folded in one.

I think all the state legislatures should be unicameral like Nebraska's. Your thoughts?

[True Federalist]

There are other reasons for bicameralism.  For instance you can have one house be fully elected each election to rapidly represent changes in the popular sentiment and have the other be only partially elected each time to be less influenced by the short term political tempests.

[greenforest32]

There are other reasons for bicameralism.  For instance you can have one house be fully elected each election to rapidly represent changes in the popular sentiment and have the other be only partially elected each time to be less influenced by the short term political tempests.

I've heard of this argument before but I don't see why you'd want to do that. Why do political sentiments need to be curtailed?

All the Nordic countries are unicameral and they don't seem to have any problems.

[Fmr. Emperor PiT]

There are other reasons for bicameralism.  For instance you can have one house be fully elected each election to rapidly represent changes in the popular sentiment and have the other be only partially elected each time to be less influenced by the short term political tempests.

I've heard of this argument before but I don't see why you'd want to do that. Why do political sentiments need to be curtailed?

All the Nordic countries are unicameral and they don't seem to have any problems.

     It creates inertia in the system, which has the desirable effect of introducing stability by minimizing change in government policy. There is a case to be made that the United States has too much inertia in its government, though.

[Free Palestine]

They shouldn't all be unicameral.  I mean, that should be up to each state.

But, I think that if a legislature is going to be bicameral, the upper house should be elected by some other method.  Otherwise it just seems kind of silly.

I wouldn't mind if California had a unicameral legislature, and also doubled or tripled it's current size.

[Californian Tony]

Of course. Having bicameral local assemblies is outright ridiculous.

[Gustaf]

There are other reasons for bicameralism.  For instance you can have one house be fully elected each election to rapidly represent changes in the popular sentiment and have the other be only partially elected each time to be less influenced by the short term political tempests.

I've heard of this argument before but I don't see why you'd want to do that. Why do political sentiments need to be curtailed?

All the Nordic countries are unicameral and they don't seem to have any problems.

On the other hand, we have party-controlled nomination processes without democratic influence which serves to shield the political establishment from rapid changes in popular sentiment. That provides a bit of inertia.

[Vasall des Midas]

There are some arguments in favor of the status quo, but not many that amount to much.
Mostly it's that way in America because it got that way.

Is there any other country in the world where regional legislatures are bicameral? Bavaria abolished its joke of a Senate (called that, btw, and elected much the same as the Irish Seanad) fairly recently.

[CultureKing]

would be fun if some of the senate chambers were elected by PR. Unfortunately I don't see that happening any time soon.

[Edu]

Is there any other country in the world where regional legislatures are bicameral? Bavaria abolished its joke of a Senate (called that, btw, and elected much the same as the Irish Seanad) fairly recently.

Out of the 23 provinces of Argentina 8 are bicameral. Catamarca, Corrientes, Entre Rios, Mendoza, Salta, San Luis, Santa Fe and more importantly the province of Buenos Aires.
The remaining 15 provinces and the City of Buenos Aires are unicameral

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Yes.

Unicameral legislature is one of the rare displays of Nebraska's wisdom.

[republicanism]

Is there any other country in the world where regional legislatures are bicameral?

Australia.

[Nichlemn]

I think the Governor's veto is a sufficient counterweight to the excesses of a unicameral legislature. If you're going to have a bicameral legislature, the two houses better well be elected by a substantially different means (some combination of different term lengths, different constituency sizes, different electoral system) or it's just needless duplication.

[Sibboleth]

Is there any other country in the world where regional legislatures are bicameral?

Australia.

Except for Queensland.

[bgwah]

Yes. Or at least make the lower house some form or PR...

[Harry]

I think abolishing the Mississippi House of Representatives entirely would be a great way to help alleviate with our annual budget crisis.

[I left.]

I think abolishing the Mississippi House of Representatives entirely would be a great way to help alleviate with our annual budget crisis.

Considering how much federal money goes to you.

[Nichlemn]

I think abolishing the Mississippi House of Representatives entirely would be a great way to help alleviate with our annual budget crisis.

Considering how much federal money goes to you.

They had that opportunity 150 years ago.

[lowtech redneck]

There are other reasons for bicameralism.  For instance you can have one house be fully elected each election to rapidly represent changes in the popular sentiment and have the other be only partially elected each time to be less influenced by the short term political tempests.

I've heard of this argument before but I don't see why you'd want to do that. Why do political sentiments need to be curtailed?

Interesting opinion for a Democrat to have with the current House of Representatives as an example writ-large....its so that purely temporary majorities cannot, without prolonged supermajority support, enact major policies that are virtually impossible to reverse through subsequent elections.

[lowtech redneck]

Yes. Or at least make the lower house some form or PR...

That would make representatives more accountable to party bosses than to their constituents.

[bullmoose88]

I think abolishing the Mississippi House of Representatives entirely would be a great way to help alleviate with our annual budget crisis.

Considering how much federal money goes to you.

Like.

[True Federalist]

I think abolishing the Mississippi House of Representatives entirely would be a great way to help alleviate with our annual budget crisis.

Considering how much federal money goes to you.

Are there any States that don't get more from our overspending Federal government than they pay in taxes?

[greenforest32]

I think abolishing the Mississippi House of Representatives entirely would be a great way to help alleviate with our annual budget crisis.

Considering how much federal money goes to you.

Are there any States that don't get more from our overspending Federal government than they pay in taxes?

Plenty of states get less back from the federal government than they pay in.

[freefair]

IMO, they should as it would make it easier to introduce PR into them and make Representative seats more...represenative and corresponding to geography and natural communities. Its also a waste to have 2 layers of legislation. Make elections once every 5 years to increase stability.

[angus]

I think abolishing the Mississippi House of Representatives entirely would be a great way to help alleviate with our annual budget crisis.

Considering how much federal money goes to you.

We could make it part of Connecticut.  Call the pieces North Connecticut and South Connecticut.  It'd be disjoint, like Michigan, but one state.  That way the input/output of federal money would be neutral, and the per-capita GDP would be somewhere in the middle.