Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.
Mark With your plan every federally elected official from the state of California could be from LA, rural representation would eliminated entirely. Wolf You are right tho about the at large plan. Since everyone would have to vote on every Rep for the state the large urban centers would carry more weight in the elections and leave the lower populated areas hi and dry.That not the way preference voting comes out. Minorities (e.g. rural voters) are MUCH more likely to be represented. There are currently 52 House reps from CA. Imagine that five representatives run at large from rural areas of the state. Almost everyone in the rural areas would vote for all five. Close to zero votes fron these areas would go to LA candidates. It is practically certain that most of the five rural candidates would be elected.Same for Greens, Libertarians, Afro-americans, Hispanic, gays, feminists, etc.Every minority gets some representation.Note: you don't have to vote for all 52 slots. You can vote for any number from 1 to 52. "Bullet voting" is the way the first non-frat student council candidate got elected at UVa. (Marshall Coleman for those who remember the name. :)Peter
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |