This is one of the consequences Dirksen warned us about of the USSC decision that made all state legislators beholden to population size and not have one house (upper house like the US Senate) represent territory or some other principle. ( Don’t remember the na.e of the decision!)The Constitution guarantees the states a Republican form of government. The state governments should mirror the Fed in structure.That decision introduced to much “mob-ocracy” into state government and you’re seeing state governments ( particularly driven by state employee & teachers unions) vote themselves larger & larger chunks of the state tax revenue.
Yes I recall learning about that case. I don’t recall the name of it either.
However, that case mandated that state senate seats be apportioned according to population, just as the state legislature or state House of Representatives were apportioned.
Before that case, some states mirrored the federal system, by having each county or other designated geographic areas within a state, have the same number of state senators, regardless of population of those counties.
Direct election of Senators.
A lesser known debacle was the “one man one vote” SCOTUS decision.
In the 1960s or early 1970s. Prior to that, States had a similar arrangement with their counties as the states do with the Electoral College.
The idea of course, was that a few large cities in a single state could not dominate the rural, lesser populated counties, there was a balance.
SELL your State and Municipal bonds and put your savings somewhere else