Thursday, April 4, 2013

Quotation Of The Day: Unicameral Legislature Edition

From Justin Green and Matt Yglesias:

Matt Yglesias urges states to slim down their legislatures:


At the national level, we have a bicameral legislature because of the overall workings of the federal system. But the non-Nebraska states have bicameral legislatures for no real reason. If you simply eliminated the lower houses, you'd end up with substantially fewer state legislators. Then you could pay them more and offer them more staff. It'd also be easier for citizens to keep track of who their elected officials actually are (can you name who represents you in your state legislature?) and make the electoral competition for the seats more fearsome.


Open question: why do states have two chambers? (Seriously).

The U.S. Senate is the product of a compromise between the states. Why do states need to emulate that model?

I wonder what this would mean for South Dakota. The State has a lot of legislators for its population. It certainly seems as if the unicameral would be cheaper.

No comments: