Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 11:53 AM Jan 2013

Republicans aim to re-introduce "3/5 of a person"

NYT's Charles M. Blow



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/opinion/blow-rig-the-vote.html?_r=0

Rig the Vote


Republican lawmakers in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin are considering whether to abandon the winner-take-all approach to awarding Electoral College votes and replace it with a proportional allocation. That change would heavily favor Republican presidential candidates — tilting the voting power away from cities and toward rural areas — and make it more likely that the candidate with the fewest votes over all would win a larger share of electoral votes.

...

The Washington Post reported Thursday that the sponsor of Virginia bill’s, Charles W. Carrico Sr., a Republican, “said he wants to give smaller communities a bigger voice.” Carrico told The Post, “The last election, constituents were concerned that it didn’t matter what they did, that more densely populated areas were going to outvote them.” Yes, you read that right: he wants to make the votes cast for the candidate receiving the fewest votes matter more than those cast for the candidate receiving the most.

...

Paul Bibeau, who writes “a blog of dark humor” from Virginia, points out a numerical oddity about the effects of the Virginia law that turns out, upon reflection, to be more stinging than funny: “This bill counts an Obama voter as 3/5 of a person.”

That is because, as Talking Points Memo says, “Obama voters would have received almost exactly 3/5 of the electoral vote compared to their actual population — 30.7 percent of the electoral vote over 51 percent of the popular vote.”

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Republicans aim to re-introduce "3/5 of a person" (Original Post) Scuba Jan 2013 OP
Good way to put it n2doc Jan 2013 #1
Yes, very insightful! eom Kolesar Jan 2013 #2
Paul Bibeau has been very humorous here on DU. JaneyVee Jan 2013 #3
Thank you! paulbibeau Jan 2013 #7
I heard from the Roanoke Times yesterday Oilwellian Jan 2013 #9
when you lose, find a way to cheat to win next time...reThug political philosophy spanone Jan 2013 #4
This message was self-deleted by its author davidn3600 Jan 2013 #5
This is a huge issue upi402 Jan 2013 #6
Rural America already over represented with US Senators. ErikJ Jan 2013 #8
I actually like that balance of populace and states. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #10
Undemocratic ErikJ Jan 2013 #11
Right, because it's the Senate that's stonewalling all of the House's great legislation. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #14
Pelosi's house put out 400 bills 2006 to 2010 ErikJ Jan 2013 #15
That is a somewhat reasonable argument. OnionPatch Jan 2013 #16
It's worse than that krispos42 Jan 2013 #12
If this isn't proof the districts are gerrymandered, I don't know what is. reformist2 Jan 2013 #13

n2doc

(47,953 posts)
1. Good way to put it
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 11:58 AM
Jan 2013

IF you are in a democratic leaning district, you are 3/5 of a voter. At least if the repubs have their way.



(edit to add toon)

paulbibeau

(743 posts)
7. Thank you!
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 02:46 PM
Jan 2013

And the piece that Blow refers to appeared on DU first! I'm willing to bet that DU people helped get the word out. I want to THUMBTACK that fraction to the GOP.

Oilwellian

(12,647 posts)
9. I heard from the Roanoke Times yesterday
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 06:50 PM
Jan 2013

They called me within two hours after I hit send. Three fifths definitely got their attention! I suspect they'll be publishing it soon, hopefully in their Sunday edition.

Response to Scuba (Original post)

upi402

(16,854 posts)
6. This is a huge issue
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 12:40 PM
Jan 2013

It will hasten the end of all life, as climate change will be ignore by Republicans who gain power by this.

Or the corporate Dems that are our "best option" in the new "political reality".

Enjoy!

 

ErikJ

(6,335 posts)
8. Rural America already over represented with US Senators.
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 02:51 PM
Jan 2013

Montana with a pop of 1 million has 2 US Senators and Calif with 30 million also gets 2 US Senators.

 

OneTenthofOnePercent

(6,268 posts)
10. I actually like that balance of populace and states.
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:01 PM
Jan 2013

It ensures that people who live in rural areas aren't getting shafted by a majority of people elsewhere who have no concern for a minorities interests. It prevents a 'Tyranny of the Majority'.

The senate represent state interests and the House represents the people's interests. I'm fine with that.
Don't forget to mention that California has 53 House Reps and Montana has only 1 and that for legislation to bass, it must be agreed upon by the House and Senate!

 

ErikJ

(6,335 posts)
11. Undemocratic
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:41 PM
Jan 2013

No matter how you spin it, rural America gets more representation per person than do the heavily populated states. Thats why the Senate cant get anything passed.

 

OneTenthofOnePercent

(6,268 posts)
14. Right, because it's the Senate that's stonewalling all of the House's great legislation.
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 08:44 PM
Jan 2013

Oh wait... NOT!

OnionPatch

(6,169 posts)
16. That is a somewhat reasonable argument.
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 11:29 PM
Jan 2013

But it doesn't justify the huge difference in political power between states like Montana and California. A Montana resident has 30 time more power in the US senate than I do, since I live in California. It's hard to feel like that's just fine and dandy.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
12. It's worse than that
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:50 PM
Jan 2013

Wyoming with 0.5 million people has two senators, as does California with 37 million people.


I've proposed before that no state should have more than 12 representatives; when you get that big, split up into smaller states. It keeps adding new states to the Union, with new state constitutions and the latest ideas in government. And it keeps a state from being too under-represented in DC.

reformist2

(9,841 posts)
13. If this isn't proof the districts are gerrymandered, I don't know what is.
Sat Jan 26, 2013, 07:54 PM
Jan 2013

In state after state, urban voters have been crammed into as few districts as possible, resulting in a relatively small number of overwhelmingly lopsided democratic districts, and relatively large number of barely-republican districts.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Republicans aim to re-int...