Like most states in the west, Oregon is dominated by an urban majority of nutbags while the suburbs and rural areas are silenced. Gray v Sanders ruined so many states by creating a second standard for legislative apportionment.
not silenced, rural folk squawk plenty,.. there is frustration, resentment,.. but our situation is unique, Oregon is split by the Cascade mountain range,.. the sparsely populated rural east is very republican, they don't feel represented by the very democratic majority on the west side. Short of creating a new state, what is your solution? Suppress the dem votes and let the repubs vote twice? Have you been to Oregon often?
My solution would be to overturn Gray v Sanders and allow states to go back to country districts for state senates.
you're making me do research and learn stuff I looked, not finding much, and I can be pretty dense,.. please explain how Gray v Sanders has affected Oregon, and why reversing it would help. Oregon Legislative Assembly Oregon House of Representatives Oregon State Senate Oregon Supreme Court.
Not unless forced. I keed. It's a beautiful state with so much to do and see. But present company aside, there are some strange-ass folks that live in Oregon. Having to research and learn stuff.....poor baby. "a Georgia statute, which was amended in 1962 so as to allocate unit votes to counties as follows: Counties with populations not exceeding 15,000, two units; an additional unit for the next 5,000 persons; an additional unit for the next 10,000; an additional unit for each of the next two brackets of 15,000; and, thereafter, two more units for each increase of 30,000. All candidates for statewide office were required to receive a majority of the county-unit votes to be entitled to nomination in the first primary. The practical effect of this system is that the vote of each citizen counts for less and less as the population of his county increases, and a combination of the units from the counties having the smallest population gives counties having one-third of the total population of the State a clear majority of county votes. " Some issues held include: . State regulation of these primary elections makes the election process state action within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. The use of this election system in a statewide election violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 376-381. (a) The District Court correctly held that the county-unit system, as applied in a statewide election, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; but it erred in framing its injunction so that a county-unit system might be used in weighting the votes in a statewide election, if the system showed no greater disparity against a county than exists against any State in the conduct of national elections. (b) The Equal Protection Clause requires that, once a geographical unit for which a representative is to be chosen is designated, all who participate in the election must have an equal vote - whatever their race; whatever their sex; whatever their occupation; whatever their income and wherever their home may be in that geographical unit. (c) The only weighting of votes sanctioned by the Constitution concerns matters of representation, such as an allocation of Senators irrespective of population and the use of the electoral college in the choice of a President. (d) The conception of political equality from the Declaration of Independence, to Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, to the Fifteenth, Seventeenth, and Nineteenth Amendments can mean only one thing - one person, one vote.
big O punkin I don't know if Oregon has a part in that play, the plot's confusing, can't tell the good guys from the bad. I'll bet you could create me a sweet dumbed down synopsis.
