• DirkMcCallahan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    11 months ago

    significant/overwhelming majority of counties

    Change “counties” to “people” and I might agree. But “significant majority of counties” is just an extension of the anti-democratic bias that we see in the Senate and EC. It should always be one-person-one-vote.

    • aidan@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      But a federalist system isn’t meant to be democratic. It is supposed to guarantee rights and some influence to everyone including minorities.

      • Pipoca@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Requiring a majority of counties to agree on things isn’t good for minorities in general.

        It generally grants outsized power to one specific minority in particular - white rural voters.

        • aidan@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yes rural voters. That is again the point. Federalism is supposed to balance power between the entities of the federation- which aren’t necessarily the populace.

          • Pipoca@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            No.

            Federalism is about division of power at different scales of government.

            In a confederation, the general level of government is subordinate to the regional level. In a unitary government, regional government is subordinate to the general level.

            Israel, the UK, and China are examples of unitary states. The EU is a confederation, and the US was one for about a decade before the constitution was passed.

            In a federal system, different levels of government are of equal power, but have different powers. States can’t control interstate commerce; the federal government can’t regulate state speed limits except by doing something like withholding federal highway trust fund money.

            While the US federal government started out as an alliance between existing colonies, states didn’t start out as an alliance of counties. US States are mostly (all?) unitary governments; Ohio counties have the powers the state government delegates to them.

            Counties historically have been a matter of pragmatic. Counties are small so everyone could easily travel to their local county government on foot or horseback. They weren’t intended as a way to gerrymander state populations to entrench rural power.

            There’s a reason that neither the Ohio senate nor the Ohio house follow ‘one county, one representative’. Because that would be absolutely bonkers.

      • lingh0e@lemmy.film
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        What are you talking about? “Minorities” in this context refers to the people with the lower number of votes cast. They lose. It’s the very definition of voting.

        • aidan@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          “Minorities” in this context refers to the people with the lower number of votes cast.

          Yes.

          They lose. It’s the very definition of voting.

          Not necessarily? Plenty of candidates lose the popular vote then win elections in all sorts of campaigns.