Redistricting | Virginia votes for temporary Redistricting

  • Thread starter Thread starter Callatoroy
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 449
  • Views: 19K
  • Politics 
Ramrouser said:
Congrats VA Dems in voting to disenfranchise your fellow citizens. I'm sure this will make your conservative brethren really support democracy in general and their "representative" government in particular. "This is what democracy looks like" indeed. I mean no question there's gerrymandering out there but 9% representation for Republicans in a purple state takes the cake.

Fortunately, the battle is not over.

1st. The Va supreme court gets to weigh in. This amendment was passed ignoring procedural rules and the wording is suspect. The Tazewell Circuit Court just ruled the referendum unconstitutional and the judge entered an injunction blocking certification of the election and denied a motion to stay pending appeal.

2nd. On to Florida!

3rd: Wait until the Supreme Court overturns racial gerrymandering in the Congressional redistricting process. Could shift 12-14 seats.

And Finally: the 2030 Census likely will shift another 10-12 seats.

Enjoy the victory as this is definitely a short term L for Rs caused, in part, by Trump.
Click to expand...
God forbid the voters decide…in a democracy!!
 
Ramrouser said:
Founders hated pure democracy where the mob rules with the power to vote themselves goodies or to vote to disenfranchise their neighbors.
Click to expand...
The Founders hated power grabs above all. They most especially hated power grabs by unchecked Executives who took all actions of Domestic and International governance as their sole domain. You seem to have no issue with that part of our current divergence.
 
The growth of Executive power has been a bipartisan issue since post WWII. “Pen and a phone.”
 
wmheel1287 said:
The Founders hated power grabs above all. They most especially hated power grabs by unchecked Executives who took all actions of Domestic and International governance as their sole domain. You seem to have no issue with that part of our current divergence.
Click to expand...
What they really hated was inherited concentrated wealth and the antidemocratic spirit it created.


Most Founding Fathers viewed concentrated, inherited wealth as a threat to a democratic republic, fearing it created a hereditary aristocracy similar to Europe. They advocated for policies like abolishing primogeniture and supported taxing inheritances to promote a meritocracy and maintain a "happy mediocrity" of widespread property ownership.
Origins: Current Events in Historical PerspectiveOrigins: Current Events in Historical Perspective +4
Key Perspectives and Actions:
  • Thomas Jefferson: Led efforts in Virginia to abolish primogeniture (first-born inheriting all) and entail (restricting land sale), arguing that "the earth belongs to each generation" and that predecessors cannot lock up property for posterity.
  • Benjamin Franklin: Viewed concentrated wealth as a danger to human happiness and supported measures to restrict it.
  • John Adams: Feared that huge wealth disparities would destroy the republic, observing that inherited luxury leads to corruption and the destruction of nations.
  • James Madison: Supported the elimination of inherited, tied-up land, but feared that commerce and manufacturing would eventually create new forms of wealth concentration that agrarian laws could not fix.
  • Thomas Paine: Proposed a tax on inheritance to create a national fund to ensure that, upon reaching age 21, every person would receive a set amount to prevent poverty.
    Origins: Current Events in Historical PerspectiveOrigins: Current Events in Historical Perspective +4
Key Concerns:
  • Anti-Aristocracy: The founders, including Washington and Jefferson, were deeply concerned that large, unearned fortunes would create a politically powerful, "haughty" elite, as noted by Monticello.org and Origins.osu.edu.
  • Economic Opportunity: They believed in a society where land and opportunity were widespread, rather than controlled by a few, as shown in PBS NewsHour coverage.
 
Ramrouser said:
The growth of Executive power has been a bipartisan issue since post WWII. “Pen and a phone.”
Click to expand...
You’re actually right about this one. But we have never before had a Congress willingly abdicate almost the entirety of its legislative role to the president, and we certainly haven’t had a Supreme Court willing to insulate the executive from the law he is charged with enforcing. To have both of those now, at the same time we have a president who sees himself as a divine right monarch, is a massive departure from anything we have experienced before. It continues to astound me you guys can’t see that.
 
Seems to me that most of the big issues in my childhood (50s-60s) were driven by the legislature and SCOTUS, Between HUAC behind McCarthy and the Dixiecrats in the Senate, both branches wielded a great deal of power.

At that same time, Earl Warren was redefining what to expect from the Supreme Court. Seems to me that the imperial Presidency began to mostly develop under Nixon and his dirty tricks. However it might be that he was caught so blatantly. Clearly LBJ was manipulative but it's more him using his clout from his time in Senate than a quest for the power of the presidency. That became clear when he didn't run again.
 
lawtig02 said:
You’re actually right about this one. But we have never before had a Congress willingly abdicate almost the entirety of its legislative role to the president, and we certainly haven’t had a Supreme Court willing to insulate the executive from the law he is charged with enforcing. To have both of those now, at the same time we have a president who sees himself as a divine right monarch, is a massive departure from anything we have experienced before. It continues to astound me you guys can’t see that.
Click to expand...
They see it. The tell is going from "Dems are bad" to "Well, both sides do it." They just like it when it's their guy because it's like an express train to the version of America they imagine in their heads. They'll be out with pitchforks (or maybe tiki torches) the next time a Dem president issues an executive order.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top