The Electoral College, a slave-owning ugly compromise from the ugly history of the North/South divide, has now denied the will of the people twice. And now on the precipice of confirming the election of the most noxious candidate in our history, it's only supposed purpose: preventing a madman from attaining the office of the President of the Unites States, it is clear the Electoral College will not do that.
There are multiple suggestions, such as Maryland's which will award its electors to the winner of the popular vote, should enough other states also adopt this.
But that still leaves the geographic bias of the electoral college. But that isn't based on territory, it's just on if you're a state.
So... let's add more (urban) states. Almost every red state city knows how this works. The city is vibrant economically, progressive, diverse, energetic, cultural, fun, and the rural politics drag it down. Embarrass it nationally. Steal its population.
Well, let's just create new states for the cities. Talk to people in Austin and Houston Texas about what it's like being in Texas. Miami is drowning by climate change and it's state legislature outlawed the concept, think they don't want to be their own state? Detroit, Michigan... Northern Indiana... Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus in Ohio? New Orleans, Louisiana? The Research Triangle in NC?
The city limits can declare themselves a state, and then surrounding counties can vote to be members of them or not.
And each new "city-state" gets its own 2 bonus electoral votes. And two senators. And the proper congressmen.
It doesn't even have to happen in a massive change. We just need one city to establish the precedent, and then it can happen organically.
Alternatively, electoral college voters can be apportioned by counties, as already is in Maine, and, I believe, Nebraska. But this system doesn't give the cities their senators and bonus electoral votes.
One intarwebber wrote:
The Constitution doesn't forbid making a state out of already existing territory, it's just more difficult. The constitution simply says that you need the consent of both Congress and the State Legislature of the state involved. States can't be combined or split "without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress" is how the constitution puts it.
So it will require Congressional control. Which won't happen for a while, but it could be the greatest redistricting play ever.
There are multiple suggestions, such as Maryland's which will award its electors to the winner of the popular vote, should enough other states also adopt this.
But that still leaves the geographic bias of the electoral college. But that isn't based on territory, it's just on if you're a state.
So... let's add more (urban) states. Almost every red state city knows how this works. The city is vibrant economically, progressive, diverse, energetic, cultural, fun, and the rural politics drag it down. Embarrass it nationally. Steal its population.
Well, let's just create new states for the cities. Talk to people in Austin and Houston Texas about what it's like being in Texas. Miami is drowning by climate change and it's state legislature outlawed the concept, think they don't want to be their own state? Detroit, Michigan... Northern Indiana... Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus in Ohio? New Orleans, Louisiana? The Research Triangle in NC?
The city limits can declare themselves a state, and then surrounding counties can vote to be members of them or not.
And each new "city-state" gets its own 2 bonus electoral votes. And two senators. And the proper congressmen.
It doesn't even have to happen in a massive change. We just need one city to establish the precedent, and then it can happen organically.
Alternatively, electoral college voters can be apportioned by counties, as already is in Maine, and, I believe, Nebraska. But this system doesn't give the cities their senators and bonus electoral votes.
One intarwebber wrote:
The Constitution doesn't forbid making a state out of already existing territory, it's just more difficult. The constitution simply says that you need the consent of both Congress and the State Legislature of the state involved. States can't be combined or split "without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress" is how the constitution puts it.
So it will require Congressional control. Which won't happen for a while, but it could be the greatest redistricting play ever.
No comments:
Post a Comment