In our political system, all of the states have 2 senators to represent them. This has created a wobble when it comes to voting on bills or electing officials. Large states with many people living in them do not get an equal share of legislative power or federal tax dollars returned.

Large states such as Texas has a population of 28.7 million people. California has a population of 39.56 Million. New York has a population of 19.54 million people. All of these large states get 2 senators to represent them. This means the senators are difficult to reach by their population when bills come up for a vote, or just don't have any power on making decisions.

Rhode Island has a population of 1.057 million people. North Dakota has a population of 672 thousand people. They get 2 senators to vote on bills. Smaller states without a lot of population are easier to reach the senator.

Let's look at the numbers. The 10 largest states (California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, Michigan) have a population of 174,131,000 people. How many Senate votes do they get at any one time? 20.

The 10 smallest states (Wyoming, Vermont, District of Columbia, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Delaware, Rhode Island, Montana, Maine) have a population of 8,748,777. How many Senate votes do they get at any one time? 20.

This means the smaller states have the same legislative power even though they're only about 0.05% as large in population. This means lobbyists can appeal to small states for bills to be passed with a lower cost and more availability of senators. And if the 10 smallest states are equal federally to the 10 largest states, why spend the cost?

The solution is something I call 'The Formula for Fair Fiscal Federalism'

Every state keeps it's 2 senators. However, if states have more than 1,000,000 people, for every 500,000 people they have they get an additional senator. This means that California would get an additional 76 Senators. Texas would get an additional 42 Senators. Illinois would get an additional 22 Senators. If you don't want that many extra senators, you can make it so the senators in power in those states get the additional votes. Those states get that many votes when a bill or federal vote comes up for discussion. Different parts of the state can have different votes. When California votes on an issue their choice might make or break it. It's based purely on numbers.

Is it completely fair? No, it isn't. It's fairer, however. Either those running offices support the formula for fair fiscal federalism or they're part of the problem. If someone has a problem with California and it's 39 million people being more powerful legislatively than say Wyoming and it's 572,381 people then they're not making sense. If they're not making sense why do you want them in office? Ask your public officials, governors, legislators, senators, and those in power publically to be in favor of the Formula for Fair Fiscal Federalism.

If we do not come up with new measures like this to fix the wobble in the federal government than nothing will change, and likely things will only grow worse. Don't be under-represented.