>States actually have rights, not just individuals
States are arbitrary and given rights by individuals. States cannot feel the effects of any law. States are not citizens.
>(Short summary: any power can become a tyranny, so keep other powers around to counter the national government.)
That's a comforting idea in the abstract, but when applied it basically means people in rural areas should have more say in the national government than people in urban areas. You're literally in favor of taking power away from people and giving it to others. You're for tyranny of the rural rather than people being treated equally. In the age of telecommunication it makes even less sense.
We're not the EU. The idea that the US is a collection of countries went out the window a long, long time ago. Federal laws have a much bigger effect on people than state laws.
The Senate is the only place where people are not proportionally represented. To argue for it is to say that people are not equal, and that states are more important than people, which flies in the face of democracy.
EDIT: To address your point below, you're in favor of taking away power from some and giving it to others based on population density. This is a horrible idea since our cities are where our most educated and most productive live.
> You're literally in favor of taking power away from people and giving it to others.
Absolutely. For the exact same reason that we don't live in a democracy. It's a feature, not a bug.
I mean, by your argument, why have a House or a Senate? We've got telecommunications, just have a vote. Direct democracy. Why not?
Well, that turns out historically to be a really bad idea. But anything short of it is "taking power away from people and giving it to others", in one form or another.
States are arbitrary and given rights by individuals. States cannot feel the effects of any law. States are not citizens.
>(Short summary: any power can become a tyranny, so keep other powers around to counter the national government.)
That's a comforting idea in the abstract, but when applied it basically means people in rural areas should have more say in the national government than people in urban areas. You're literally in favor of taking power away from people and giving it to others. You're for tyranny of the rural rather than people being treated equally. In the age of telecommunication it makes even less sense.
We're not the EU. The idea that the US is a collection of countries went out the window a long, long time ago. Federal laws have a much bigger effect on people than state laws.
The Senate is the only place where people are not proportionally represented. To argue for it is to say that people are not equal, and that states are more important than people, which flies in the face of democracy.
EDIT: To address your point below, you're in favor of taking away power from some and giving it to others based on population density. This is a horrible idea since our cities are where our most educated and most productive live.