Comments on: U.S. Supreme Court Won’t Hear Challenge to California Voting Rights Act http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/15/us-supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-california-voting-rights-act/ Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:13:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=6354 By: Demo Rep http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/15/us-supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-california-voting-rights-act/comment-page-1/#comment-138906 Demo Rep Wed, 17 Oct 2007 18:12:53 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/15/us-supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-california-voting-rights-act/#comment-138906 A *democratic* legislative body exists ONLY because ALL of the electors - voters can NOT assemble in person and vote on all issues. The district stuff will produce one more minority rule regime - a plurality of the votes in a bare majority of the districts is about 25 percent minority rule. Remedy- Proportional Representation Party Seats = Party Votes x Total Seats / Total Votes THUS - ANY group of voters equal to Total Votes / Total Seats should elect a legislator. Much too difficult for the math MORONS in the various governments (especially the courts) to understand. A *democratic* legislative body exists ONLY because ALL of the electors – voters can NOT assemble in person and vote on all issues.

The district stuff will produce one more minority rule regime -
a plurality of the votes in a bare majority of the districts is about 25 percent minority rule.

Remedy- Proportional Representation

Party Seats = Party Votes x Total Seats / Total Votes

THUS – ANY group of voters equal to Total Votes / Total Seats should elect a legislator.

Much too difficult for the math MORONS in the various governments (especially the courts) to understand.

]]> By: Deemer from California http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/15/us-supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-california-voting-rights-act/comment-page-1/#comment-138022 Deemer from California Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:55:44 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/15/us-supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-california-voting-rights-act/#comment-138022 This whole idea that just because a certain ethnic group has not been represented on a City Council is PREPOSTEROUS. This law totally ignores any reason why no ethnics are elected. One, just because a group is counted as 25% in the census, it ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT mean that the eligible voters are 25%. Within the State of California over 20% of the residents are foreign born many of whom are not yet eligible for citizenship if they are even INTERESTED in trying to acquire it when they become eligible. Second, in many cases these groups are less interested in the local charity work that would get them noticed in the city. Third, there is the matter of the cost of campaigning. Many of these people run for office severely hampered in what they can raise & spend in a campaign. Spending the most money doesn't guarantee getting elected it does, however, make it a lot easier. Four, this idea is very un-American in that it WRONGLY pre-supposes that people should be elected under a quota system without regard as to whether or not they are truly competent for the position at that time. Five, this is also a matter of the State telling a city that you can run your elections any way you want just so long as the people WE want get elected. Six, carving up a city every 10 years would encourage rampant gerry- mandering. In many cities, ethnic populations do not live in compact delineated neighborhoods anymore. It would just be another excuse for the State Courts to interfere in local government. Seven, just who is to decide just which ethnic or racial minorities are to be coddled by this system. Remember, in 2000 the Census foolishly decided that people did have have to state a single racial classification anymore. So, I would contend that they are nothing as far as this issue of which ethnic/racial group they belong to. Eight, what about the people from Latin America who are fully European ancestry? They are not mixed with the pre-Columbian Indians & so should be counted as white and not Hispanic! Which would reduce the percent age of Hispanic people ENTITLED to the own council member. Nine, most politicians that have been forced to resign due to corruption came from "VERY" safe districts which this would create a great deal more of in California. Ten, I would appreciate comments from other readers as to the viability and/or errors in my arguements against this law. This whole idea that just because a certain ethnic
group has not been represented on a City Council is
PREPOSTEROUS. This law totally ignores any reason why
no ethnics are elected. One, just because a group is
counted as 25% in the census, it ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT
mean that the eligible voters are 25%. Within the
State of California over 20% of the residents are
foreign born many of whom are not yet eligible for
citizenship if they are even INTERESTED in trying to
acquire it when they become eligible. Second, in many
cases these groups are less interested in the local
charity work that would get them noticed in the city.
Third, there is the matter of the cost of campaigning.
Many of these people run for office severely hampered
in what they can raise & spend in a campaign. Spending
the most money doesn’t guarantee getting elected it
does, however, make it a lot easier. Four, this idea
is very un-American in that it WRONGLY pre-supposes
that people should be elected under a quota system
without regard as to whether or not they are truly
competent for the position at that time. Five, this
is also a matter of the State telling a city that you
can run your elections any way you want just so long
as the people WE want get elected. Six, carving up a
city every 10 years would encourage rampant gerry-
mandering. In many cities, ethnic populations do not
live in compact delineated neighborhoods anymore. It
would just be another excuse for the State Courts to
interfere in local government. Seven, just who is to
decide just which ethnic or racial minorities are to
be coddled by this system. Remember, in 2000 the
Census foolishly decided that people did have have
to state a single racial classification anymore. So,
I would contend that they are nothing as far as this
issue of which ethnic/racial group they belong to.
Eight, what about the people from Latin America who
are fully European ancestry? They are not mixed with
the pre-Columbian Indians & so should be counted as
white and not Hispanic! Which would reduce the percent
age of Hispanic people ENTITLED to the own council
member. Nine, most politicians that have been forced
to resign due to corruption came from “VERY” safe
districts which this would create a great deal more
of in California. Ten, I would appreciate comments
from other readers as to the viability and/or errors
in my arguements against this law.

]]> By: Joel http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/15/us-supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-california-voting-rights-act/comment-page-1/#comment-137851 Joel Mon, 15 Oct 2007 19:48:23 +0000 http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/15/us-supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-california-voting-rights-act/#comment-137851 I would agree at-large elections using the plurality voting method does make it hard for minorities to elect a candidate of choice. However, several municipalities involved in at-large voting lawsuits have addressed the problem by using proportional voting methods such as cumulative, limited, or choice voting, instead of separating the area into new districts. I would agree at-large elections using the plurality voting method does make it hard for minorities to elect a candidate of choice. However, several municipalities involved in at-large voting lawsuits have addressed the problem by using proportional voting methods such as cumulative, limited, or choice voting, instead of separating the area into new districts.

]]>