Look, let me start by stipulating the accuracy of your initial reaction. I know it is not likely and I like to think I understand why it isn’t likely. That fact however, does not address the titular question. I also know that it would be hard. The system is set up specifically for it to be hard. In that manner flippant and frivolous changes are significantly less likely to get through. That fact however, does not address the titular question either. Regardless of the difficulty factor or the unlikelyness of its coming to fruition, first we have to decide if it could work. After that, should there be sufficient interest, we have to decide if it is actually desirable. Then and only then do we need to consider the difficulty.
It occurred to me recently that there is a potential simple fix to our nation’s political dysfunction. Notice I did not call it an easy fix. I said nothing about it being quick. The question of the financial cost has not left my lips.(or fingertips) I merely point out that it is a simple fix that most everyone should be able to understand even if they hate the idea.
The power in the USA is supposed to reside with the people, expressed through their vote. Elected officials are ideally, there to serve as the proxy for the power their constituents hold. Certain fairly recent interpretations of the Constitution have severely diminished that power by encouraging the elected representatives to show fealty to those individuals, groups, companies and industries that donate large sums of money to their campaigns. An awful lot of that is sufficiently systemic as to make it too large of an issue to address - at least, that is what we are supposed to think.
My point is that we can think of this as though it were a car. As a general rule one doesn’t discard one’s car because of a flat tire or a bad alternator. Instead, we fix what is wrong and keep the car going. Sometimes you use OEM parts but, a lot of the better quality parts are made by unaffiliated companies. Keep that concept in mind.
While there are plenty of areas that could be improved if we had the political will and intellect, to me the closest thing to a single point of failure is the US Senate. The Senate is even less democratic than is the Electoral College. In the Senate, the 5th largest economy in the world has the same influence as the 10th smallest state economy. That seems like something we can address to make more equitable. So my idea is to give all Senators an equal share of the population.
The current accepted population count of the USA is ~342million. So we assign each of the 100 Senators (for now I am ignoring the injustice of those territories and areas we control and tax but without representation but, that is a fine subject for a different day.) roughly 3,420,000 citizens that they represent. Ideally, we would populate the map with 100 squares or rectangles of whatever size it takes to be inclusive of 3,420,000 humans. (no gerrymandering) Rather obviously, the House of Representatives would continue as they are. The responsibilities and duties of the Senate would not change. The Senators would simply no longer be affiliated with a single state. Instead their rectangle’s population would be their concern.
In this way, each CITIZEN would have the same level or representation and politically and culturally inert land would have significantly diminished influence on the system. I get that NYC would have at least 2 Senators representing their 8.3 million citizens while a huge expanse from TX to Canada could be covered by a single Senator. The point is that it is the citizenry that the Constitution mandates be represented NOT the land they live on.
In the crowded Northeast, the polygons would be physically small and dense in population. Personally, I would prefer that each Senator’s area include citizens from a minimum of 2 states and no two Senators would have exactly the same constituency. (Hey, we have computers and A.I. to assist in drawing the polygons in an equal and fair manner.) I acknowledge this idea to be a mere starting point with shitloads of details yet to be worked out. I am under no illusion this is a fully formed plan.
Now go back and read the first paragraph again. Instead of you shaking your head and laughing about what a stupid idea this is, tell me exactly why it would not work. I am not talking about how much work is involved in changing the Constitution or other aspect(s) of why implementing it would be hard. Imagine it as a done deal and then tell me what the problems are. Could it work? What is superior about the current system that would be lost in the system I describe? Would this be a desirable change? If not, why not?
I tend to like my ideas but I also try to poke holes in them. I understand that the imperfection of humans extends to our constructs - physical or cultural. Still, after thinking about it, I like it.
[EXTRA:!!]
When I was writing my first draft of this essay I had not yet conceptualized the idea of no two senatorial districts being the same. I made a query to Google Gemini and I am including the entirety of its reply to me because I’m lazy and it is easier to quote it than to rewrite it and make it my own.
[QUERY TO AND RESPONSE FROM GOOGLE GEMINI]
Query: can you create a map of the USA containing 50 rectangles that each contain 6,840,000 people
Response: Creating a map where the United States is divided into 50 rectangles of equal population (approximately 6.84 million people each) is a fascinating data visualization challenge.
Because the U.S. population is so heavily concentrated in coastal cities and specific urban corridors, these "rectangles" would vary wildly in size—some would cover several massive rural states, while others would be tiny slivers over Manhattan or Los Angeles.
Since I am a text-based AI, I cannot generate a high-resolution image file for you directly, but I can describe the layout logic and provide the Python code you can use to generate this exact map.
How the "Rectangular Map" Would Look
If we were to draw these 50 zones based on the current U.S. population of ~342 million:
The Northeast: You would see dozens of tiny, dense rectangles packed into the Bos-Wash corridor (Boston to D.C.).
The Great Plains: A single rectangle might stretch from the Canadian border down to Texas to capture enough people.
The West: California would be sliced into about 6 distinct rectangles, while the "Empty Quarter" (NV, UT, WY, ID) would be part of one massive, sprawling block.
Python Script to Generate Your Map
You can run this code in a Python environment (like Jupyter or Colab) using geopandas and matplotlib. It uses a "recursive treemap" logic to split the country into 50 population-equal areas.
Python
import pandas as pd
import geopandas as gpd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from squarify import squarify
# Note: This logic uses a Treemap approach to visualize
# the 50 "units" scaled by population density.
def plot_50_equal_rectangles():
# Target population per rectangle
total_pop = 342000000
target_per_rect = 6840000
num_rects = 50
# Creating a visual representation of the 50 blocks
values = [target_per_rect] * num_rects
labels = [f"Unit {i+1}" for i in range(num_rects)]
plt.figure(figsize=(12, 8))
squarify.plot(sizes=values, label=labels, alpha=0.7,
color=[plt.cm.viridis(i/50) for i in range(50)])
plt.title("US Population Divided into 50 Equal Rectangles (Schematic)")
plt.axis('off')
plt.show()
# To run this, you would need the 'squarify' library: pip install squarify
Why a "Perfect" Map is Difficult
Creating this with geographic accuracy (keeping the rectangles perfectly rectangular on a real map) is mathematically impossible because:
Irregular Borders: The US is not a rectangle; filling a jagged shape with 50 perfect rectangles leaves gaps.
The "Grid" Problem: If you use a grid, you have to "warp" the lines to account for the fact that Wyoming has 580,000 people while New York City has 8.3 million.
A Better Alternative: The Cartogram
Most data scientists use a Cartogram for this. In a cartogram, the shapes of states are preserved, but their size is distorted based on population.
Fun Fact: If you divided the US this way, the state of California would contain nearly 6 full rectangles, while Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, North Dakota, and South Dakota combined wouldn't even fill half of one rectangle.
Would you like me to generate a list of which states would be grouped together to form these 6.84-million-person blocks?
No comments:
Post a Comment