Why does California have a Senate?

Does it serve some purpose? Four year terms aren’t so very much longer than two. They don’t represent counties anymore. Just because the Feds have a Senate (in all its splendor) isn’t much of a reason for us to have one.

I’d trade it in for term limits. You can be re-elected as many times as your district wants to vote for you but you have to run every two years.

Or, even more blue-sky: Increase the size of the Assembly and make the new 40 seats statewide party list seats. If you get 2.5% of the vote, you get a seat. Or some such arrangement, maybe not statewide. But the two major state parties are such failures, I think it’d be good to get some wild cards in there.

3 thoughts on “Why does California have a Senate?”

  1. Is a unicameral legislature with smaller districts and more representatives.

    New America Foundation has a nice proposal for a mixed legislature with some elected from districts and others elected from eight regions with proportional representation.

  2. I agree with everything you’re saying, and I have thought about this a lot.

    Nebraska, iirc, is a unicameral state.

    I think sectional interests in California (i.e. north vs. south; coast vs. inland) might necessitate some body elected along geographical lines, but in general, I think a proportionately elected house with many more members (so that we might actually know who they are) is a great idea.

Comments are closed.