Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
I like to call this 'Berrymandering'. I like to call it that

GrundleStiltzkin
Member Posts: 61,516

in Tug Tavern
The cº
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.
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.”
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.
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.
Comments
-
Seems like winning an election would be easier
-
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. -
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. HTHSledog 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.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
-
DC would be burned to the ground like it was 1814 all over again.GrundleStiltzkin said: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.
-
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.MikeDamone said:
Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
-
Thank God for the electoral college.2001400ex said:
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.MikeDamone said:
Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
-
You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.MikeDamone said:
Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
-
Yeah, pissed. I remember the day well.HustlinOwl said:
You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.MikeDamone said:
Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
JFC. -
Eh. Was prob a bad ideaHustlinOwl said:
You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.MikeDamone said:
Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
-
I made that joke to my wifePitchfork51 said:
Eh. Was prob a bad ideaHustlinOwl said:
You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.MikeDamone said:
Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
Quite honestly she didn't disagree -
Pressing badly... holy shitHustlinOwl said:
You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.MikeDamone said:
Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
-
I say we go back to a similar system at least regarding ownership and taxes.HustlinOwl said:
You guys must have been pissed when females and non-landowners got the right to vote. Unconstitutional.MikeDamone said:
Agree. The founders set it up the way it is for a reason. A bunch of emotional imbeciles want to change it.Sledog said:I don't want a few large counties controlling the country.
No land or income taxes and you don't get to vote. Skin in the game should be a requirement.