Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill • Hacker News Board

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#101

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:28 PM UTC

CalChris wrote: post #66

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Senate was absolutely one of the best features of government. Unicameral legislatures are uniformly godawful. In as much as it is imperfect, it is only so because Congress has become more unicameral-like... senators are little more than representatives that stay in office six years instead of two.

WHY is the Senate absolutely one of the best features of government? In Britain, its name more honestly reflected the class it represents, House of Lords.

In Britain there is no Congress. The name of the House of Lords has nothing to do with the United States' Senate. If we are to believe that its form and function were inspired by some other nation's government, then let's talk about its true namesake: the Roman Senate.

I reject your Peel all apples because orange rinds are bitter! nonsense.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#102

Post by giantg2 » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:28 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #82

mothballed wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The federal government wasn't supposed to represent the people though for the vast majority of its function, it was supposed to essentially mediate interstate affairs and provide protection from foreign incursion. The vast majority of what it does now, which acts on people rather than states, is a result of exceeding the powers constrained in the 10th amendment. The federal government is breaking because it is operat…

I'm well aware of the reasoning for the design -- although I will point out that the notion of an extremely constrained federal government was controversial then, hardly consensus among the founding fathers. But the design clearly is not fit for where our society is or the direction it is moving, people have much more affiliation with the national entity than with the state entity, and it simply does not make sense t…

If you are from a smaller state, you would think it would still make sense. Otherwise the rural concerns just get steamrolled by the urban concerns. The point still stands about trying to level out concerns between smaller and larger states, which is why it was created with years of debate and a majority even if it wasn't consensus.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#103

Post by hemp_is_canvas » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:28 PM UTC

runako wrote: post #100

hemp_is_canvas wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

76/100 senators voted to keep this provision. 39/50 states sent requests to Congress to have this banned. It is a bipartisan effort.

Yes, none of this is in conflict with my message.

Blame everybody who is responsible, please.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#104

Post by Y-bar » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:28 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #88

Y-bar wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Non-American here). Couldn’t it also work by guaranteeing each state X seats and then the rest Y seats are set according to census data on population? For example a single house with 100 reserved seats, and on top of that one seat per 500k citizens?

this is essentially how the electoral college functions

Not as far as my limited understanding is, USA still has a Congress and a House, and the comment thread I replied was specifically about abolishing the Congress for a different solution. And as far as I know USA has not abolished the Congress, right?

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#105

Post by dogleash » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:28 PM UTC

Y-bar wrote: post #73

potato3732842 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The senate kind of makes more sense the bigger the country is. You need something that essentially represents each whole state as a unit. This is also why they originally weren't directly elected. When you consider that the OG federal government mostly dealt in issues that were common to the states or very clearly interstate the reason they chose the architecture they did for the senate seems even more sensible. They…

(Non-American here). Couldn’t it also work by guaranteeing each state X seats and then the rest Y seats are set according to census data on population? For example a single house with 100 reserved seats, and on top of that one seat per 500k citizens?

>Couldn’t it also work by guaranteeing each state X seats and then the rest Y seats are set according to census data on population?

Yes. If you call the "X" club the Senate and the "Y" club the House of Representatives, this is exactly how our bicameral legislature works.

edit: Their votes count for passage in their chamber, not equally weighted against eachother. If you mean Y seats equal seats by population but with a minimum X, then that's how the House works. Any proposal to make the senate proportional starts to ask why we're not unicameral because then you basically have 2x house of reps but with different voting district sizes.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#106

Post by whimsicalism » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:29 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #89

whimsicalism wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You need something that essentially represents each whole state as a unit. You can have a group of people that represent each state as a unit. Political power should absolutely be proportional to population represented though.

"Political power should absolutely be proportional to population represented though." That's your opinion. The opinion of people in Wyoming is likely different. What the facts would show if you look into the history of why the Senate was necessary, it would show that smaller states wouldn't have joined, and would be justified in leaving. The real problem is that the scope of decisions at the federal level has gotten…

Yes, in case you didn't notice, everything we are stating is opinions.

I absolutely reject the notion that the senator from Wyoming should have equal political power to the senator from Texas or California, I think it is absurd, I don't doubt that some people in Wyoming disagree.

I think Wyoming joining the US as a state without equal representation as the most populous state would still be a massive win for them and they would have almost certainly taken the deal at the time.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#107

Post by whimsicalism » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:30 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #102

whimsicalism wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm well aware of the reasoning for the design -- although I will point out that the notion of an extremely constrained federal government was controversial then, hardly consensus among the founding fathers. But the design clearly is not fit for where our society is or the direction it is moving, people have much more affiliation with the national entity than with the state entity, and it simply does not make sense t…

If you are from a smaller state, you would think it would still make sense. Otherwise the rural concerns just get steamrolled by the urban concerns. The point still stands about trying to level out concerns between smaller and larger states, which is why it was created with years of debate and a majority even if it wasn't consensus.

I'm from an even smaller political entity than Wyoming, although we don't get any Senate representation at all. It would be beyond absurd to grant us equal voting power to California and obviously not a sustainable way of constructing a political system.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#108

Post by Y-bar » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:30 PM UTC

dogleash wrote: post #105

Y-bar wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Non-American here). Couldn’t it also work by guaranteeing each state X seats and then the rest Y seats are set according to census data on population? For example a single house with 100 reserved seats, and on top of that one seat per 500k citizens?

>Couldn’t it also work by guaranteeing each state X seats and then the rest Y seats are set according to census data on population? Yes. If you call the "X" club the Senate and the "Y" club the House of Representatives, this is exactly how our bicameral legislature works. edit: Their votes count for passage in their chamber, not equally weighted against eachother. If you mean Y seats equal seats by population but wit…

Point is, they would not have different roles, but instead work as a single house which votes on issues and laws and then delegates the result to the executive branch. No dual ”clubs” or houses with separate votes or separate elections.

This is how my country works.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#109

Post by jandrewrogers » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:31 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #4

The Senate is fundamentally a ridiculous way of representing 350 million people and we’re going to continue to get absurd unrepresentative outcomes for as long as it remains a relevant body. There’s no getting around this and it will structurally just get worse and worse. Simply no way something like it exists 200 years from now, it is probably the biggest flaw in the US political structure right now.

Senators represent their State government, not the people. Americans didn't even vote for Senators until sometime in the 20th century. Traditionally they were selected by the State legislatures. Similarly, the President is the President of the States, not the people.

If you don't have this then you don't have a Federal Republic.

The House of Representatives, on the other hand, is intended to represent the people.

Re: Hemp ban hidden inside government shutdown bill

#110

Post by whimsicalism » Thu, Nov 13, 2025, 5:32 PM UTC

Y-bar wrote: post #104

whimsicalism wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is essentially how the electoral college functions

Not as far as my limited understanding is, USA still has a Congress and a House, and the comment thread I replied was specifically about abolishing the Congress for a different solution. And as far as I know USA has not abolished the Congress, right?

Senate and House - congress is both bodies. My point was merely the additive scheme you described is how electoral college votes are allocated.