Were we or were we not given legal equality in the US Constitution, Bob?
That is the question.
— —
Districting automatically creates a result that discriminates. It turns voters into winners and losers. That is fine for the Federal level because it is declared as such; it is therefore the law. Everywhere else, we should have voter equality in the outcome.
We call the candidates that won district elections representatives, but collectively they are not representative of the voters. Only the majority of the voters (50% + one vote as minimum) have all the seats. The outcome is warped therefore toward the larger political entity.
Here is an image to show you what is going on:
In this example, you can see the district format for eight seats to the left. Each separate election gives the seat to 50% + one vote as minimum (in green). A maximum of 49.99% of the voters (in white) is not getting represented by their own choice.
To the right is the clean voting system. All eight seats of this example are voted on in one election: one person, one vote, and not eight votes. The green (the minimum of getting what you want) is 88.89%, while the white (the maximum of not-getting what you want) is 11.11%. The wishes of the voters are optimized for the eight seats.
Obviously, the outcome to the left benefits the large parties because they can hog all the seats. Voters are suppressed in their political freedom. This system does not guarantee equality for all voters but rather severely undermines it.
The outcome to the right benefits the voters because they can express themselves more accurately. Political freedom is optimized. This system optimizes equality for all voters. We can say that this outcome is representative of what the voters wanted.
--
Thomas Jefferson already devised the clean voting system.
As well-known, the Federal elections are specifically declared in the US Constitution and that is how it therefore should be.
What happened next is that the States did not want to have that clean voting system for State elections, and instead of providing that legal equality as required, they copied and pasted the Federal format.
Insult to injury, they demanded that cities and counties also reject the equal clause and hold discriminating local elections. The voters are truly hurt by this system; this is a severe taking from the voters.
Once again: the State is empowered in the US Constitution; cities and counties are not (see Tenth Amendment).
--
Bob, I will let this reply of yours stand for today, but I remove all replies on this page, and will do so with your reply tomorrow. We do this to give the people that asked us to invoke the US Constitution in their cities and counties their protection in this first step. Later on (step four), when these voters take this issue to court, then they will have to make themselves known. But up to then, we give them the security of remaining anonymous.
Thank you for your reply here. As mentioned, I'll leave it up for one day.
