--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>At 08:24 AM 12/18/00 -0600, Dan M. wrote:
> >Why are geographic minorities the important ones?
>
>Because geographic distinctions are the basis of nation-states, and >it is
>geographical differences, that if left unaddressed, eventually >foment
>civil wars.
Technically, this is not true. Indeed, the U.S. Civil War is now called the
War Between the States by most because it was not a true civil war. The
southern states wished to succeed from the Union; they didn't want to gain
control of the Union. I think the Spanish Civil War and the war between the
Reds and the Whites in Russia are examples of Civil War. Its true that in a
shooting war that each party to the war tends to have a geographical base
and there are fighting lines.
Wars can also break out where ethnic minorities have a homeland within the
country. In our country, we have ethnic minorities congregated in the big
cities. I would argue that giving extra votes to low population states
would tend to exasperate any tensions, not ameliorate them.
>
>>Why are rural voters enshrined, and various types of urban voters >>lower
>>class people that are lumped together?
>
>Well, urban voters are still very important. It should be pointed >out
>that large States like MI, PA, FL, and CA historically play very important
>roles in election. It is these big and urban states that >contain the
>large caches of votes necessary to reach a majority.
John, you continuously refer to states instead of people. I would argue that
the question of whether the United States is vs. the United States are was
settled rather decisively about 136 years ago. The question I'm raising is
whether giving voters in low population states more votes for president is
fair and good for the country. It is a fact that a voter in Montana has the
equivalent of 5 votes for president compared to 1 vote for a Texan. Is this
right?
We can see the negative impact of this in how Western states are heavily
subsidized by the Federal government, with handouts like below cost grazing
and water, while inner cities get next to nothing. 10% of the population in
states like Montana or Wyoming has tremendous clout and cannot be ignored.
12% of the population in big cities can be successfully ignored by one of
the parties and taken for granted by the other. This is, at least in part,
due to how our Senate and presidential vote is set up.
Dan'm Traeki Ring of Crystallized Knowledge.
Known for calculating, but not known for shutting up
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
