Wednesday, December 06, 2006
california voting rights act of 2001 upheld as facial constitutional - lawsuit may continue as an as-aaplied challenge. pdf. not very familar with the cvra, but it is designed to make it easy to sue cities with at large voting (and handwaving allegations of racially polarized voting.)
Both the act, and the court, are confused. It is not the at-large method of voting which dilutes votes. It is the method of at large voting.
Instead of a one-person one vote rule, each voter gets to vote for each district, and the candidate with a majority of the votes in that district wins the seat.
This is a problem, but it's a different problem than at-large voting.
The best solution to enhance diversity is to put in one-voter one-vote.
Then a polarized minority voting group can elect its own candidate without needing to carry a majority.
Both the act, and the court, are confused. It is not the at-large method of voting which dilutes votes. It is the method of at large voting.
Instead of a one-person one vote rule, each voter gets to vote for each district, and the candidate with a majority of the votes in that district wins the seat.
This is a problem, but it's a different problem than at-large voting.
The best solution to enhance diversity is to put in one-voter one-vote.
Then a polarized minority voting group can elect its own candidate without needing to carry a majority.
Comments:
Post a Comment
