That would not make any sense. The Senate represents the
states. They are effectively the ambassadors from each state,
so 1 or every two states would be very impossible.
--- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience@pobox.com> wrote:
> Geoff Tillman wrote:
> >
> > True, but to have a voice in congress and the choosing of
> the
> > president you have to be a state. Puerto Rico and Guam
> will
> > probably gain statehood eventually. As to the flag if
> more
> > states join more stars are added. Their are designs
> already
> > made which have 51-60 stars (just in case). Everytime a
> state
> > has join it has always gotten a star. And lets not forget
> > that their were originally 13 states not 50. And Alaska
> and
> > Hawaii did not acheive statehood untill 1959 and 1960
> > respectfully.
>
> I was recently musing that the Senate was originally
> intended to have 26
> members... maybe a few more as time went on, but still 26
> originally. A
> small, tight group; not like a Senate of 100 at all. One
> Senator of 26,
> nationwide, would have considerably more prestige than one
> Senator of
> 100. People might even be able to remember who they are.
>
> Maybe it's time to jump to one Senator for every two states
> instead of the
> other way around. Not that it'll ever happen. It's just
> one item more
> for the little list.
>
> -- -- -- --
> --
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
> http://singinst.org/
> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial
Intelligence
=====
"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master
...Sid Meier
When we turn away from the darkness of
our past to take comfort in our peaceful lives, we
sometimes forget how dearly that peace was bought. But
there is much worth remembering in the darkness..."--Tolkein
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:38 MDT