Puerto Rico territorial status
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 10:00:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Puerto Rico territorial status
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: what should happen to Puerto Rico
#1
statehood
 
#2
the current status quo should remain
 
#3
become a sovereign independent Nation
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 48

Author Topic: Puerto Rico territorial status  (Read 2016 times)
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,326
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 07, 2013, 12:18:48 AM »

anyone think if Puerto Rico becomes a state we could get a larger House of representatives for good.
yes, a lot
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 07, 2013, 01:27:06 AM »

Under the 2010 Census, with no other state losing representatives, Puerto Rico gets 5 Representatives.  It would have gotten 6 with the 2000 Census numbers.  It likely gets 5 in 2020, with or without a return to 435.  And I think a return to 435 is likely.  The small states perceive they have more political power with a smaller House.
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,146
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: March 08, 2013, 02:05:53 PM »

Puerto Rico's government is very right-wing.
Who cares? The politics of a prospective state should not matter.

And anyway, I suspect that PR would be likely/safe D.
Logged
politicallefty
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,244
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -9.22

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: March 09, 2013, 04:25:09 AM »

Under the 2010 Census, with no other state losing representatives, Puerto Rico gets 5 Representatives.  It would have gotten 6 with the 2000 Census numbers.  It likely gets 5 in 2020, with or without a return to 435.  And I think a return to 435 is likely.  The small states perceive they have more political power with a smaller House.

I don't know if a substantially larger House is possible, but I could see the House increasing in a way as to not make PR statehood penalize the states that would lose representation. An even-numbered House is taboo (and for good reason), so 440 would not work. I don't know if there's a certain number that sounds good, but maybe something like 441 (or even 445 or 449). I'd say it's unlikely the House reverts to 435 with PR statehood. (Note that even with the DC Voting Rights Act, the proposal was for a permanent increase to 437.)
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: March 09, 2013, 05:11:50 AM »

An even-numbered House is taboo (and for good reason), so 440 would not work.

We nearly always have at least one vacancy anyway, so it wouldn't really make much difference whether it's odd or even.
Logged
politicallefty
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,244
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -9.22

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: March 09, 2013, 05:35:17 AM »

We nearly always have at least one vacancy anyway, so it wouldn't really make much difference whether it's odd or even.

It's usually the case that any vacancies are safe seats. Even so, I think most would rather have a full House at an odd number. An odd-numbered House will give an absolute result. If all Members of Congress voted, I'd rather not have the Speakership (and Majority) tied up as a result of an even-numbered House.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,156
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: March 09, 2013, 06:18:30 PM »

An even-numbered House is taboo (and for good reason), so 440 would not work.

There's no particular reason for even numbers to be considered taboo.  Back before the size of the House was fixed at 435, apportionments were as likely to have even numbers of Representatives as they would odd.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.036 seconds with 13 queries.