I'll add a few thoughts. It's an interesting topic, and depends on "where you sit" as you all have said. That said, Subsquid's issue of his two senators' action is not directly pertinent, but certainly a great example of why some might say the system "isn't fair" because of their own experience with it. In his example, I'm amazed and can't believe these staffers are acting appropriately -- why? Not sure, but certainly this is something his son should follow-up on -- maybe in person or by phone to a local office where the staff may be more inclined to think "constituent service." I just can't believe that any MOC, if confronted in person with such a story, would respond that "Yep, the staff was right - nothing we can do - too bad for your kid." In short, don't accept their response. (I'd find out who the Senator's chief of staff/AA was, have your son call them directly, and ask if that was really what they meant.)
Back to the topic itself. I live in a state with two senators and one congressman. My son will have three "chances" at a nomination like everyone else, but better chances (than those in more populated states) with our two senators. But that's just for a nomination. Regardless of that part of the equation, we see multiple appointments for the academies just in our small "city" (100K pop.). In fact, in my sophomore son's high school graduation class (2007) of 37 there were two AFA and one USNA appointments, although to two people. (One turned down her AFA appointment and the other chose Navy, you'll be pleased to hear!) We have three public, two private HS's in town and there was one other AFA appointment and another USNA plus one WP appointment -- ie, three AFA, two USNA, one USMA just in our town. Arguably, there should be 3-each appointments for NA, WP, AF across our whole state, but it's hard to imagine such a concentration in our part of the state.
So while I'll concede the "better chances" of nomination in states with less population for the nominations of the two senators, does it automatically follow that it equates to better chances of appointment? Seems to me that if the lack of a nomination were so critical, the academies would not be sending out LOA's if there was a real chance it would be reneged on for lack of a nomination.
USNA69, you and others have stressed to apply for "all the nomination sources for which you are qualified" and have gone on to explain many times the flexibility that gives the academies. I was told that those MOC's who put their nominees into competition actually help ALL the nominees nationwide to rise to the top and that there is lots of mixing and matching that goes on. One person even said (and I've always wondered if it could be correct) that some candidates are appointed from one state using the MOC's nomination of another state, because that MOC put all their nominees "in competition" -- no primary or numbered alternates -- and NONE of them competed successfully on a nation-wide basis.
Hope your cold is better -- remember, "summer colds" that drag on and on usually are something else!