[Grovenet] Reflections on Minority Rule

[Jeff Cooper]

First I would like to thank John Schrag for the link to his excellent article on 
this topic.  The very same issues have come to bear in other areas of Oregon, and with very similar results, namely a "minority" vote of anywhere between 44 and 49% of important issues being voted down due to lack of participation.

David's suggestion of reaping the voting rolls is a good one; indeed California did have a law (at least when I was there) that if you didn't vote in the general election you would have to re-register for the next election.  This will keep most of the dead people from voting (although there might be a few transplanted Chicagoans here, who knows?).  

Steven argues:

But keep the power in the people, not the minority. That helps keep 
us a democracy.


His argument runs along the line that since only a few voted, that a majority is not in order, and that we will undermine democracy if we overturn the double majority voting rules during off years.  

Democracy requires *active participation* to work effectively.  The current system undermines democracy by encouraging nay voters to stay away from the polls entirely during a single issue election.  Unless we either change the law (and others have mentioned there are attempts to do that), or make sure that no single issue measure comes to the ballot (perhaps by extending the mayor's term one year and then having mayoral and/or other elections during the off-election years), we will continue to undermine democracy given the status quo.  

Katie has rebutted the argument that the original rationale for this law is passe, since there is no way for government to slip legislation through unnoticed due to the fact that we now have mail-in ballots (not to mention extensive local press coverage, banners over Pacific and numerous lawn signs in this election).  Apparently Sizemore was concerned that unions would stuff ballots by getting members actively engaged in these types of elections (from Schrag's article).  Personally I don't see unions having that much of an impact here in Forest Grove, and don't know about the state at large, but that seems to be a fairly weak argument as well.  If any union wished to make such a strong statement, there undoubtedly would be strong countervailing forces as well; it is unlikely that a pro-union ballot stuffing piece of legislation would become law without serious opposition.

If we want democracy to prevail, we need to encourage participation, not dissuade it as this double majority rule does.  I don't know how many people stayed away from the polls to keep the numbers down, but I'm guessing that at least a few hundred did.  The bitter irony of knowing that you have to make a choice to vote no, or have a stronger voice by not voting at all to vote down legislation is appalling, counter-intuitive, and yes, undemocratic.

Regards,

Jeff Cooper




       
---------------------------------
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
 Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.