Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

I like to call this 'Berrymandering'. I like to call it that

GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,481
First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
Standard Supporter
The cº
American democracy is broken.

We have a president who lost the popular vote, a Senate where the “majority” represents about 15 million fewer people than the “minority,” and a Supreme Court where two justices were nominated by that president and confirmed by that unrepresentative Senate.

An unsigned note, entitled “Pack the Union: A Proposal to Admit New States for the Purpose of Amending the Constitution to Ensure Equal Representation” and published in the Harvard Law Review, offers an entirely constitutional way out of this dilemma: Add new states — a lot of new states — then use this bloc of states to rewrite the Constitution so that the United States has an election system “where every vote counts equally.”

To create a system where every vote counts equally, the Constitution must be amended. To do this, Congress should pass legislation reducing the size of Washington, D.C., to an area encompassing only a few core federal buildings and then admit the rest of the District’s 127 neighborhoods as states. These states — which could be added with a simple congressional majority — would add enough votes in Congress to ratify four amendments: (1) a transfer of the Senate’s power to a body that represents citizens equally; (2) an expansion of the House so that all citizens are represented in equal-sized districts; (3) a replacement of the Electoral College with a popular vote; and (4) a modification of the Constitution’s amendment process that would ensure future amendments are ratified by states representing most Americans.


Under the Constitution, new states may be admitted by an ordinary act of Congress with a simple majority vote. The Constitution does, however, prevent new states from being carved out of an existing state unless the legislature of that state consents. Chopping up the District of Columbia gets around this problem because Washington, DC, is not a state.

https://www.vox.com/2020/1/14/21063591/modest-proposal-to-save-american-democracy-pack-the-union-harvard-law-review

Obviously this is beyond moronic. Further testament to the horrors of late-stage TDS.
Tagged:

Comments

  • Options
    MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 37,781
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    edited January 2020
    Sounds like the representative republic is functioning as intended.


    JFC. What a bunch of sore losers. I thought accepting the results of elections was the cornerstone of our union. All the dems said so.
  • Options
    SledogSledog Member Posts: 30,809
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    edited January 2020
    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
  • Options
    2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Someone didn't actually read what was proposed. Right now your vote doesn't matter. Mine went to spotted owl. And Race/Mike's/Bob's went to Hillary. HTH
  • Options
    PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 41,861
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    The cº

    American democracy is broken.

    We have a president who lost the popular vote, a Senate where the “majority” represents about 15 million fewer people than the “minority,” and a Supreme Court where two justices were nominated by that president and confirmed by that unrepresentative Senate.

    An unsigned note, entitled “Pack the Union: A Proposal to Admit New States for the Purpose of Amending the Constitution to Ensure Equal Representation” and published in the Harvard Law Review, offers an entirely constitutional way out of this dilemma: Add new states — a lot of new states — then use this bloc of states to rewrite the Constitution so that the United States has an election system “where every vote counts equally.”

    To create a system where every vote counts equally, the Constitution must be amended. To do this, Congress should pass legislation reducing the size of Washington, D.C., to an area encompassing only a few core federal buildings and then admit the rest of the District’s 127 neighborhoods as states. These states — which could be added with a simple congressional majority — would add enough votes in Congress to ratify four amendments: (1) a transfer of the Senate’s power to a body that represents citizens equally; (2) an expansion of the House so that all citizens are represented in equal-sized districts; (3) a replacement of the Electoral College with a popular vote; and (4) a modification of the Constitution’s amendment process that would ensure future amendments are ratified by states representing most Americans.


    Under the Constitution, new states may be admitted by an ordinary act of Congress with a simple majority vote. The Constitution does, however, prevent new states from being carved out of an existing state unless the legislature of that state consents. Chopping up the District of Columbia gets around this problem because Washington, DC, is not a state.

    https://www.vox.com/2020/1/14/21063591/modest-proposal-to-save-american-democracy-pack-the-union-harvard-law-review

    Obviously this is beyond moronic. Further testament to the horrors of late-stage TDS.
    DC would be burned to the ground like it was 1814 all over again.

  • Options
    2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes

    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.
    They also set it where members of the electoral college can vote differently than the state voting results. But you forget that and would have burned everything down if they put Hillary in. Like they were constitutionally allowed to do.
  • Options
    SECDAWGSECDAWG Member Posts: 5,004
    5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Anniversary First Comment
    edited January 2020
    2001400ex said:

    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.
    They also set it where members of the electoral college can vote differently than the state voting results. But you forget that and would have burned everything down if they put Hillary in. Like they were constitutionally allowed to do.
    Thank God for the electoral college.

  • Options
    HustlinOwlHustlinOwl Member Posts: 953
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment 5 Awesomes

    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.
    You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.
  • Options
    MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 37,781
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam

    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.
    You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.
    Yeah, pissed. I remember the day well.

    JFC.
  • Options
    Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 26,595
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker

    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.
    You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.
    Eh. Was prob a bad idea
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 101,381
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam

    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.
    You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.
    Eh. Was prob a bad idea
    I made that joke to my wife

    Quite honestly she didn't disagree
  • Options
    CuntWaffleCuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,493
    First Anniversary 5 Fuck Offs 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes

    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.
    You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.
    Pressing badly... holy shit
  • Options
    SledogSledog Member Posts: 30,809
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    edited January 2020

    Sledog said:

    I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.

    Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.
    You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.
    I say we go back to a similar system at least regarding ownership and taxes.

    No land or income taxes and you don't get to vote. Skin in the game should be a requirement.
Sign In or Register to comment.