Voting Rights

[Seacoaster(1)]

South Carolina GOP asks the Court to permit them to use racially gerrymandered districts because doing otherwise will cause confusion. That it dilutes the votes of thousands of African-Americans…well, we can deal with that after Nancy Mace is secure in Congress for another blathering term?

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/315792/

[runrussellrun]

South Carolina GOP asks the Court to permit them to use racially gerrymandered districts because doing otherwise will cause confusion. That it dilutes the votes of thousands of African-Americans…well, we can deal with that after Nancy Mace is secure in Congress for another blathering term?

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/315792/

What kind of society uses "race" to set districts.

Here's a game. This is one of the rules of your new society. the part bolded: how would you proceed in building your sims city. Massachusetts used to have sixteen (16) US Representatives. Now, with a much larger human population, that number has dropped to 9. That doesn't appear to be following the rules.

Section 2
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

[runrussellrun]

South Carolina GOP asks the Court to permit them to use racially gerrymandered districts because doing otherwise will cause confusion. That it dilutes the votes of thousands of African-Americans…well, we can deal with that after Nancy Mace is secure in Congress for another blathering term?

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/03/315792/

What kind of society uses "race" to set districts.

Here's a game. This is one of the rules of your new society. the part bolded: how would you proceed in building your sims city. Massachusetts used to have sixteen (16) US Representatives. Now, with a much larger human population, that number has dropped to 9. That doesn't appear to be following the rules.

Section 2
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

No one cares about the law, and you're stupid US Constitution. ALL of our ills and woes are only one parties doing. Watched Oppenhiemer (wonderfully done, and also a conspiracy theorist wet dream ), and Sen. Thurmonds name was mentioned. Was that pos a democrat, or republican ?

[runrussellrun]

When Bernie Sanders won the New Hampshire primary in 2016, with over 70% of the vote....the second place candidate STILL walked away with more delegates.

We solved the "race" issue with the 14th amendment. Capping, our "representative" form of government, based on a population literally one third of what we have today.......yeah.....the problem is African American's living somewhere. geezbus......

https://www.npr.org/2021/04/20/98886541 ... sus-counts

For decades, the size of the U.S. House of Representatives has pitted state against state in a fight for political power after each census.

That's because, for the most part, there is a number that has not changed for more than a century — the 435 seats for the House's voting members.

While the House did temporarily add two seats after Alaska and Hawaii became states in 1959, a law passed in 1929 has set up that de facto cap to representation.

It has meant that once a decade, states have had to face the prospect of joining a list of winners and losers after those House seats are reshuffled based on how the states' latest census population counts rank. How those seats are reassigned also plays a key role in presidential elections. Each state's share of Electoral College votes is determined by adding its number of House seats to its two Senate seats.

For most of the House's history, however, states did not lose representation after the national head count's results were released. Generally speaking, as the country's census numbers grew, so did the size of the House since it was first established at 65 seats by the Constitution before the first U.S. count in 1790.

COMIC: How Your State Wins Or Loses Political Power Through The Census
NATIONAL
COMIC: How Your State Wins Or Loses Political Power Through The Census
At the country's founding, many framers were concerned that the original House was "way too small," according to Yale University law professor Akhil Reed Amar.

"This might seem esoteric today, but you got to remember that the Constitution is the product of an American revolution. And that revolution was all about a key idea — no taxation without representation," says Amar, author of the upcoming book The Words That Made Us: America's Constitutional Conversation, 1760-1840. "If you're going to have big-time taxation and anemic representation, people are going to say, 'Wait a minute. We want to be taxed by people who know us, who look like us, who understand the concerns of their constituents in their districts.' "

After the 1840 census — and in one of the last decades before the 14th Amendment ended the census's counting of an enslaved person as "three fifths'' of a free person — Congress did drop the number of House seats from 242 to 232. The latest census numbers showed an increase compared with the 1830 results, but Congress could only agree on a smaller House size after Senate pushback over increasing the number of seats.

"And then it went back up and resumed the growth process again," says census historian Margo Anderson, author of The American Census: A Social History.

There's nothing at all magical about the number 435 Congress settled on.

Dan Bouk, associate professor of history at Colgate University

That growth plateaued after the 1920 census, when Congress, for the first time in history, did not pass a new law about how to use the results of the latest national tally to reshape the House.

"The apportionment system failed," explains Dan Bouk, an associate professor of history at Colgate University who has written a new report for the research institute Data & Society about how lawmakers in the 1920s ultimately shaped the House's current size.

Some congressional leaders at the time pushed to leave it at 435 seats, the size it had grown into after Arizona and New Mexico joined the union in 1912.

"The thing that really caused the apportionment to get hung up over and over again throughout the 1920s was the insistence of a set of leaders that the House of Representatives could no longer grow any larger," Bouk says. "They said it's about efficiency. They didn't want to pay for more office space, to pay for more Congress people and more clerks. They believed the House couldn't be a deliberative body if it grew any larger."

Immigration Hard-Liner Files Reveal 40-Year Bid Behind Trump's Census Obsession
NATIONAL
Immigration Hard-Liner Files Reveal 40-Year Bid Behind Trump's Census Obsession
While those kinds of arguments against making the House bigger were not new, they won out in 1929, when Congress passed the law that set up an automatic process for reapportioning the House based on the existing number of seats.

"There's nothing at all magical about the number 435 Congress settled on," Bouk adds.

In fact, there has been discussion over the decades about expanding the House, which would require Congress to pass a new law. But Bouk notes that the system for automatically redistributing 435 House seats after each census has created "a kind of inertia that makes such changes very unlikely."

Still, Anderson, the census historian, says she's concerned about how representative the House actually is at this unchanging size. A century ago, there was one member for about every 200,000 people, and today, there's one for about every 700,000.

"Congress has the authority to deal with this anytime," Anderson says. "It doesn't have to be right at the census."

And it might have to if, for example, Washington, D.C., or Puerto Rico becomes a state.

Until then, there will still be a fight for the power in 435.

[MDlaxfan76]

So pleasant having this clog any useful information sharing and discussion. Projection and invective all that is being added.

[Seacoaster(1)]

So pleasant having this clog any useful information sharing and discussion. Projection and invective all that is being added.

And the garbage heaps up with him responding to himself.

[runrussellrun]

The late 1920's legislation......in direct violation of the US Constitution, locked the number of US House of reps. Why ?

What was the purpose of limiting the number ? To prevent Black humans for holding office ? Another form of Jim Crow...



https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL30378

African Americans in Congress Since 1870: Totals
and in Each Congress
The first African American to serve in the Senate, Hiram Revels of Mississippi, was sworn in on
February 23, 1870. The first African American to serve in the House, Joseph Rainey of South
Carolina, was sworn in on December 12, 1870.
Both chambers subsequently had periods without any African American Members. The longest
period for the House stretched from the 57th Congress (1901-1903) until the beginning of the 71st
Congress (1929-1931), or 28 years. The longest period for the Senate stretched from the
beginning of the 47th Congress (1881-1883) until the beginning of the 90th Congress (1967-1968),
or 86 years.

[runrussellrun]

So pleasant having this clog any useful information sharing and discussion. Projection and invective all that is being added.

And the garbage heaps up with him responding to himself.

I posted an NPR article.

yup, garbage.

you sound closed minded.

[runrussellrun]

Well , looky here. John Q. Tilson, the republican , who, with other GOP leaders, passed the law thumbing its noze at the US Constitution, with his 1929 appropriations act. Same person voted NAY, for women to vote. Move along...........actually representing the population would mean democracy. More representation for Black Americans.

https://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Wo ... 878523.php

Women voting: 100 years ago, a lone CT lawmaker voted nay

Voting rights.....how about REPRESENTATIVES rights.

you sound closed minded.

[runrussellrun]

South Carolina would most likely benefit in having two more members of Congress (House only ), to represent the humans of South Carolina.

Not sure if this would specifically help, or hurt any particular demographic, in adding two more House seats, but it would certainly help the people of South Carolina be better represented in our Federal system.

Another possibility is dividing up the South Carolina state Rep districts. Certainly, a good number of "minorities" has/have benefitted by having so many S.C. state Rep. and Senate seats.. ....to represent the demographics.

YES.......less representation is better than more. Nixon loved this kind of stuff.

Clinton could take down AOC in a micro-second, and she knows. Imagine, if the city of New York had twice as many members of Congress, AOC say what she really wanted.

Dont care how rich you are, its just the amount of work involved controlling the vote. Heck, only a 20% increase, would add another 87 House members.

But that would still only add two more Congress members to states like Massachusetts. Five shy of the Representation the Bay state residents enjoyed 100 years ago.

A dictator shuts down elections. The Ukraine actor dude, did just that.

YES.........yes, support this.

Meanwhile, Jim Brennan types swore off of Commie stuff........of course he did.

[MDlaxfan76]

clogging with nothing on topic.
Close, but not on topic and discussed long ago
But we know it's a pet peeve and it all fits into the unitary conspiracy ethos.

[runrussellrun]

clogging with nothing on topic.
Close, but not on topic and discussed long ago
But we know it's a pet peeve and it all fits into the unitary conspiracy ethos.

You seem confused.

Posting a link, which discusses Congressional districting: a ok if seacoaster does it.

Discussing adding more Congressional districts: NOT ok if sucks does.

pronouns are "we" and "suck"

and yet, the trannies aren't crazy. They and their refers to plural. Crazy.....oh, sucks knows crazy.

the inbold......hilarious.

Yup, the Blacks of South Carolina wouldn't benefit in having another black member of Congresss. Better to dog whistle racism in regards to redistricint.

"mold, in the back of the fridge"

you seem confused. and rude.

aisgaf

[MDlaxfan76]

And accurate.

The discussion of the number of Congressional districts was beaten to death years ago, multiple times.

And it's not on topic. We suggested back then to start a new thread if that's what you want to discuss...if anyone's interested, they'll engage.

But we know it's a pet peeve and it all fits into the unitary conspiracy ethos, so you just clog up other discussions with more squirrels.

[runrussellrun]

And accurate.

The discussion of the number of Congressional districts was beaten to death years ago, multiple times.

And it's not on topic. We suggested back then to start a new thread if that's what you want to discuss...if anyone's interested, they'll engage.

But we know it's a pet peeve and it all fits into the unitary conspiracy ethos, so you just clog up other discussions with more squirrels.

does the redistricting of South Carolina only affect Nancy Mace?

[runrussellrun]

no, just like you I will say what I want when I want where I want stop being a threat nanny



Your hate towards suck, is proven over and over again that you show hate towards the LGBTQ community, which I am a part of


your constant attacks on me because I'm a homosexual bisexual, or hateful and hurtful and act of violence and I ask you to please stop


I am not mold strange that you don't think you can be rude. Oh well. feel free to leave anytime

[MDlaxfan76]

And accurate.

The discussion of the number of Congressional districts was beaten to death years ago, multiple times.

And it's not on topic. We suggested back then to start a new thread if that's what you want to discuss...if anyone's interested, they'll engage.

But we know it's a pet peeve and it all fits into the unitary conspiracy ethos, so you just clog up other discussions with more squirrels.

does the redistricting of South Carolina only affect Nancy Mace?

why do you ask?

The map appears quite intentionally designed to dramatically reduce representation of candidates supported by African Americans. According to the Supreme Court of South Carolina, racial gerrymandering. And yes, it protects Mace...and other Republicans.

SCOTUS appears to be fine with that...

[MDlaxfan76]

no, just like you I will say what I want when I want where I want stop being a threat nanny



Your hate towards suck, is proven over and over again that you show hate towards the LGBTQ community, which I am a part of


your constant attacks on me because I'm a homosexual bisexual, or hateful and hurtful and act of violence and I ask you to please stop


I am not mold strange that you don't think you can be rude. Oh well. feel free to leave anytime

what?

Just a suggestion about your pet peeve being its own thread. Let it compete for attention on the interest in the topic.
If you decide instead to clog just to be a pain in everyone else's neck, that's on you.

[runrussellrun]

help us out here what does redistricting have to do with voting rights?

[runrussellrun]

I called it. We are now a Banana Republic.

start your own topic and stop clogging the voting rights thread

[runrussellrun]

no, just like you I will say what I want when I want where I want stop being a threat nanny



Your hate towards suck, is proven over and over again that you show hate towards the LGBTQ community, which I am a part of


your constant attacks on me because I'm a homosexual bisexual, or hateful and hurtful and act of violence and I ask you to please stop


I am not mold strange that you don't think you can be rude. Oh well. feel free to leave anytime

what?

Just a suggestion about your pet peeve being its own thread. Let it compete for attention on the interest in the topic.
If you decide instead to clog just to be a pain in everyone else's neck, that's on you.

see my post below or above, but also in the 80 pages they're all devoted. All the comments are devoted to voting rights? You sound close minded