Should each region elect a Senator?

[Hatman 🍁]

So, a narrow majority of you would be OK with increasing the number of Senate seats if it means electoral reform. Let's keep this in mind going forward; It will allow for more options.

I realize there is a movement to reduce the number of regions. This wont be about that.

Some people are very attached to the notion that each region should have its own Senator, while some people feel we should do away with regional Senators. What is your opinion?

A yes vote does not necessarily mean you think the remaining 5 (or more) senators should be elected the same way as they are now. However, if you believe the entire Senate should represent the regions (e.g. 2 senators per region), vote for the third option.

[Blair]

I could be wrong, but each region electing a senate helps to balance out the parties and voices in the Senate. I know a different method could be used to ensure this but I like the fact that the South and Pacific tend to elect more conservative choices (I could be wrong) whilst the Northeast, Mideast and Midwest goes more liberal

[Adam Griffin]

3 Regions; 2 Senators elected from each with no at-large Senators

Add the second chamber with 11 House members elected at-large

[Hatman 🍁]

This poll is not about how many regions there are.

[Talleyrand]

The main thing they're useful for in terms of gameplay is for the more interesting, competitive elections. You don't get those in the regular proportional representation elections we have in this game.

I wouldn't be opposed to replacing them with districts though, provided then the whole senate was compromised of districts.