> But a national popular vote system wouldn’t devalue the votes of people who live in rural states and small towns. It would accurately value them by treating them equal to people who live in cities, rather than giving them an extra weighting.
While mostly in favor of national popular vote, I don't think this is accurate. If I can promise to enact a policy that favors urban area and goes against rural areas interest, I will do so because a big city will get me more votes than a bunch of small towns.
True, not all policies are zero-sum game, but that's the scenario where I see this problem of putting rural areas in the background arising.
> But a national popular vote system wouldn’t devalue the votes of people who live in rural states and small towns. It would accurately value them by treating them equal to people who live in cities, rather than giving them an extra weighting.
While mostly in favor of national popular vote, I don't think this is accurate. If I can promise to enact a policy that favors urban area and goes against rural areas interest, I will do so because a big city will get me more votes than a bunch of small towns.
True, not all policies are zero-sum game, but that's the scenario where I see this problem of putting rural areas in the background arising.