The Eastern and Western grids are interconnected.

Energy can't be moved as easily as food

It can be moved much easier. Electricity moves at the speed of light (through an ideal conductor).

If you generate electricity in Iowa you can't easily sell it to California.

Within the Eastern and Western grids, power generated anywhere can be easily sold anywhere else within the respective grids. For example, the Intermountain Power Project in Utah has historically supplied a significant portion of electricity to Southern California.

Moving power between these grids is a little more complicated --- only because the grids are not synchronized. But this too is technically possible and could be made easier if there was more demand to do so.

To add, there are many proposals[1] for Senate[2] reform[3]. Even a cursory glance reveals[4] an abundance[5] of different[6] suggestions[7].

1. https://dc.law.utah.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1378&con...

2. https://casten.house.gov/imo/media/doc/senate_constitutional...

3. https://democracybillofrights.org/how-and-why-to-reform-the-...

4. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09626...

5. https://casten.house.gov/media/press-releases/casten-introdu...

6. https://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/RI...

7. https://electoral-reform.org.uk/when-it-comes-to-fair-votes-...

And that's not baked into the Constitution—it was set by law in the early 1900s, and could be changed by law.

If we were to uncap the size of the House of Representatives, and instead change so that each district contains 50k people (or close to it), we would have roughly 7k representatives in the House.

That would effectively eliminate the disproportionate advantage small states have there. (It would not, of course, do anything about the Senate; that would have to be addressed separately.)

I have a different reason why the conclusion doesn't follow: while it's true that less populous states have outsized influence in the senate, the constitution doesn't require (and in fact, originally discourages) the federal government to engage in the kind of activities being discussed here. These activities should be the domain of the states. But a long history of expanding federal power (and various supreme court decisions affirming those expansions along, in my opinion, dubious interpretations of both the constitution and various statutes, especially the commerce clause) has led to this issue.

The fact that North Dakota has a lot more influence in the US Senate than California on a per capita basis shouldn't be that big of a deal, because the US Senate should be doing a whole heck of a lot less than it is, and states should be picking up that slack.

The more power and responsibility we have given the federal government, the more the issues appear....because it's doing things never intended or envisioned by the founders.

It’s not about what I want. The view I shared above was shared the Founding Fathers of the US, and the writers of its constitution. For example Federalist 57, 68, and 76.

So I’m not talking about “politics” as an emergent social phenomenon I am talking about the deliberate process of setting up a government.

My statement was descriptive not prescriptive. I make no claims about, in a vacuum or for all situations, whether a technocrat is better than one who is not, just that many of their government is made up of them and they seem to be doing well.

In practice it isn't the slamdunk you imply.

In practice, China is very different from the USA. For example, China doesn't have open presidential elections.

I'm not an apologist for Chinese repression, but America still has or once had slavery, child labor, torture (Abu Ghraib), patent medicine and unsafe food, racist policies that prevent wealth accumulation (redlining), mass pollution, racism and mistrust of non-white-skinned people, a terrible healthcare system for most, and still debates over the utility of vaccines, has a poor K-12 education outcome, refuses to severely punish notorious white-collar criminals and make their victims whole, immunizes its law enforcement from prosecution when it violates others' civil rights, and vests the President with absolute immunity or a presumption of immunity in exercising its powers. And those are just the embarrassments and atrocities I can think of right now.

We still have a lot to answer for.

Yeah, people here are insane to believe the CCP is some kind of technocratic benevolent autocracy.