[Grovenet] Reflections on Minority Rule

[allnutt]

When you contemplate veto power, the image that usually comes to mind is a 
wiser authority that
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Morelli" <jo.david at verizon.net>
To: "Forest Grove local interests list" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Reflections on Minority Rule


> If we are to have a 50% vote requirement, perhaps we should ensure
> that the voter rolls are purged every two years following the general
> election.  Everyone who has not voted at least once in the two years
> and everyone who has died/moved is removed from the voter rolls.
>
> David
>
> On May 16, 2007, at 10:53 AM, Jeff Cooper wrote:
>
>> 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 The law requiring a 50% turnout should be repealed.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
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>