[Grovenet] Reflections on Minority Rule

[John Schrag]

Ed: here's some more background

http://www.forestgrovenewstimes.com/opinion/story.php?story_id=1176317886491
68700


John Schrag
Editor & Publisher
The News-Times
Forest Grove, Oregon
503.357.3181

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of Ed Davie
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 11:20 AM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Reflections on Minority Rule

I can't believe it's constitutional! Why hasn't it 
been tested?
Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jeff Cooper
  To: Forest Grove local interests list
  Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:53 AM
  Subject: [Grovenet] Reflections on Minority Rule


  According to today's Oregonian the Public Safety 
levy will fail.  Please note the following 
statistics:
  Partial returns show the levy passing by a 3 to 
1 margin.
  The measure will fail because of a 44.1% turnout 
(50% required).

  This election shows the folly and difficulty of 
the 50% law.  First, 44% truly reflects a strong 
turnout for an election with truly only one issue 
(only one of the school board vacancies were 
contested and indeed a large number of site 
council positions had no candidate at all).

  Some may argue that this 3-1 margin shows 
overwhelming support for the levy, but the 
election set-up skews results.  Many voters may 
have purposefully stayed away from the election 
because they knew that if they voted "no" they 
might have *helped the levy pass."  Simple math 
shows the following:

  8,712 Registered voters @ 44.1% turnout = 3842 
votes cast
  3 to 1 ratio of yea to nay = 2882 yeah and 960 
nay
  Assuming that all the yea voters voted (they 
have to vote in to pass the levy), if another 514 
residents cast their votes (assuming all nays), 
then the measure would have passed.  Indeed, it 
would have taken almost 2000 more nay votes or 
5764 total votes with a whopping 67% turnout to 
vote down the levy.

  This leads to my following conclusions which may 
have been discussed before,  and are by no means 
the last word on the subject but I feel are valid:
  1. Single issue ballots should not come to 
referendum if a 50% rule is in order.
  2. The democratic process in general is 
undermined when not voting is more powerful than 
voting.  As noted above, if 500 more voters voted 
nay, the levy would have passed.
  3. The law requiring a 50% turnout should be 
repealed.

  Yes, I'm a transplanted Berkeley liberal, but I 
feel that this issue transcends party lines and 
strikes directly at the fundamentals of democracy. 
My own feelings about the levy notwithstanding, 
I'm appalled that we live within a system that 
allows an overwhelming 3 to 1 *voted* mandate to 
go down to defeat in this way.  A system which 
discourages people from voting should not be 
continued in this country.

  Regards,

  Jeff Cooper


  ---------------------------------
  Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
  Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for 
today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
  _______________________________________________
  GroveNet mailing list
  GroveNet at rdrop.com
  http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet