Home/Recent kwiples > Issues >

political (in)equality

Wednesday 17th of April 2024

2016 Presidential election Eligible and actual voters   Eligible Actual Totals voters voters Eligible: 231,556,622 100%   Didn't: 95,214,088 41%   Voted: 136,342,534 59% 100%  Clinton: 65,514,395 28% 48% Trump: 62,853,497 27% 46% Others: 7,974,642 3% 6%   As of December 7, 2016.  Eligible based on data from heavy.com; actual on data from uselectionatlas.org © 2016 Kwiple.com
2016 Presidential election In the “world's greatest democracy,” the candidate with the most votes lost the election, yet again © 2016 Kwiple.com
2020 Presidential election Chance of a Biden Electoral college win if he wins the popular vote by X points: 0-1 points: just 6%! 1-2 points: 22% 2-3 points: 46% 3-4 points: 74% 4-5 points: 89% 5-6 points: 98% 6-7 points: 99% Nate Silver, 12:11 PM - Sep 2, 2020 © 2020 Kwiple.com
2020 Presidential election Turnout projections are running at around 150 million this year (137 million voted in 2016), which would mean that if [Nate] Silver is right, Biden could win by 3 million to 4.5 million votes and still have less than a 50 percent chance of becoming president.  If Biden won by 4 percent to 5 percent, or 6 million to 7.5 million votes, Trump would still have a one-in-ten shot of prevailing. Paul Waldman, Washington Post, September 2, 2020 © 2020 Kwiple.com
Ask candidates … What will you do to decrease political inequality? © 2015 Kwiple.com
By the numbers Democratic House candidates netted 1.3 million more votes than Republicans in 2012, but secured 33 fewer seats. Tim Dickinson, Rolling Stone, June 29, 2017 © 2017 Kwiple.com
By the numbers In the 2016 presidential race, the 100 biggest donors have spent more than the 2 million smallest donors combined. Brennan Center for Justice © 2016 Kwiple.com
Congress Although women and minorities were still underrepresented [in Congress] at the end of the twentieth century, both groups gained considerable ground during the postwar period. In sharp contrast, working-class Americans — who have made up more than 50 percent of the labor force for at least the last hundred years — have never made up more than 2 percent of Congress. Nicholas Carnes, White-Collar Government [2013] © 2019 Kwiple.com
The Constitution of the United States Few Americans are aware that under the Constitution, a candidate could lose the popular vote and the Electoral College and still become president. In fact, it’s already happened [in 1824]. … In other words, assuming Mr. Trump is still a free man, he could be picked by  the House to be the 47th president, even if  Mr. Biden wins millions more popular votes and the most electoral votes. James Wegman, New York Times, October 14, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
The Constitution of the United States From the census of 2000 it is easy to calculate that an amendment could be blocked by thirty-four senators from the seventeen smallest states with a total population of 20,495,875, or 7.28 percent of the population of the United States. If miraculously the amendment were to pass the Senate it could then be blocked by thirteen state legislatures in the smallest states with a total population of 10,904,865, or 3.87 percent of the population of the United States. Robert A. Dahl © 2018 Kwiple.com
The Constitution of the United States Thus the requirement that an amendment must gain the votes of two-thirds of the members of the Senate gives a veto power to Senators from the small states, and these Senators may act in concert with other colleagues who foresee a reduction in the influence of their states on the presidency. Robert A. Dahl, How Democratic Is the American Constitution?  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Democracy In our democracy, power is derived from the people, but structures empower some people over others. The Senate empowers a minority of predomi- nantly white conservative voters to elect enough senators to block the will of the majority. Over the past few decades, changes in the Senate's rules have meant that senators representing as little as 11 percent of the population can deliver the obstructionist agenda these white conservative voters desire, blocking progress across most issues. This dynamic renders these voters abnormally powerful. This group is not just a minority, it is a superminority. Adam Jentleson, Kill Switch © 2021 Kwiple.com
Democracy [That] the seven might, in particular instances be right, and the seventeen wrong, is more than possible. But to establish a positive and permanent rule giving such a power to such a minority, over such a majority, would overturn the first principle of free government. James Madison, letter to Edward Everett, August 28, 1830 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Democracy There are two circumstances in particular in which a minority may feel that majority rule violates  political equality. One …[is]… the case where those who vote with the majority are affected much less by the decision, or have fewer interests at stake, than those who form the minority. Although heads have been counted equally, it appears as though preferences or interests have not. The second circumstance is where one group finds itself in a minority repeatedly when votes are taken. … In other words, we have the problem of the intense  minority and the problem of the persistent  minority. David Miller, Political Philisophy © 2018 Kwiple.com
Economics [T]he best economic order would help to generate a distribution political resources favorable to voting equality, effective participation, enlightened understanding, and final control of the political agenda by all adults subject to the laws. … But we may reasonably demand that our economic order also be just. Robert A. Dahl, A Preface to Economic Democracy © 2018 Kwiple.com
Electoral College The Electoral College is just one example of how an increasingly urban country has inherited the political structures of a rural past. Today, states containing states containing just 17 percent of the American population, a historic low, can theoretically elect a Senate majority. New York Times, November 21, 2016 © 2016 Kwiple.com
Electoral College I'll keep raging against the electoral college. Because we could have a different future. To see what it's like, all you have to do is look at how things work in every other democracy in the world. Pay close attention, because it gets pretty complicated: People vote. The votes are counted. The person with the most votes wins. Weird, huh? Paul Waldman,, Washington Post, September 2, 2020 © 2020 Kwiple.com
Electoral College I used to like the idea of the Popular Vote, but now realize the Electoral College is far better for the U.S.A. Donald Trump, 7:17 PM – 19 Mar 2019 © 2019 Kwiple.com
Electoral College Since almost all states award their Electoral College votes on a winner-take-all basis, you do just as well if you win a state by one vote as if you win it by one million. Then factor in that the allocation of electoral votes isn't even proportional to the state' sizes: every state gets at least three, creating a bias toward small states. It's not hard to see how this odd system has handed the presidency to the candidate who got fewer votes four [now five] times since the Founding … [or] how [it] encourages presidential candidates to focus on swing states at the expense of [all other states]. Zachary Roth, The Great Suppression © 2016 Kwiple.com
Extremism One reason Republicans keep radicalizing is that, unlike Democrats, they don't need to win over the majority of voters. Michelle Goldberg, New York Times, September 11, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
Filibusters The ease of use is what made it such a powerful tool for McConnell. Even Richard Russell could not have organized 137 filibusters in two years, which is the number McConnell deployed against Obama from 2009 through 2010. But under the rules of the modern Senate, doing so was as easy as making a sign-up sheet. All it took was a phone call or an email from a single Republican senator and the threshold on any bill or nomination would shoot up from a majority to a supermajority, effectively granting the minority veto power. And there is nothing the majority can do about it. Adam Jentleson, Kill Switch © 2021 Kwiple.com
Filibusters In practical terms, it essentially means that a simple majority of 51 votes isn't nearly enough to pass legislation. If you don't get 60 votes for a bill, it's dead. Which means, theoretically, senators from the 21 least populated states representing just 11% of Americans could overrule everyone. It seems pretty extreme. So, to quote everyone who's ever sat in a bathroom stall with a 3" gap in the door — why on earth was it designed this way? John Oliver, Last Weeek Tonight, September 8, 2019 © 2022 Kwiple.com
Gerrymandering Armed with census data, Republican lawmakers [in Wisconsin in 2011] drew districts to maximise their political advantage. In the 2012 elections, Republicans won 48.6% of the vote but took 60 of the state assembly's 99 seats., In 2014 and 2016, their 52% of the vote got them 63 and 64 seats. The Economist, October 7, 2017 [2012: 60/99 = 60.6% = 1.25 × 48.6%] [2014: 63/99 = 63.6% = 1.22 × 52%] [2016: 64/99 = 64.6% = 1.24 × 52%]  © 2017 Kwiple.com
Gerrymandering Gerrymandering has a long and unpopular history in the United States. It is the main reason that the country ranked 55th of 158 nations — last among Western democracies — in a 2017 index of voting fairness run by the Electoral Integrity Project, an academic collaboration between the University of Sydney, Australia, and Harvard University's John F. Kennedy  School of Government, in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Nature, Vol. 546, 8 June 2017 © 2017 Kwiple.com
Gerrymandering In Pennsylvania five years ago, Republicans won 13 of 18 House seats with just 49% of the statewide vote. North Carolina's map gives Republicans ten seats and Democrats three, despite close statewide votes. When asked why, a Republican lawmaker who headed the redistricting process said, “Because I do not believe it's possible to draw a map with 11 Republicans and two Democrats.” The Economist, October 7, 2017 © 2017 Kwiple.com
Gerrymandering Jonathan Mattingly swings his legs up onto his desk, presses a key on his laptop and changes the results of the 2012 elections in North Carolina. On the screen, flickering lines and dots outline a map of the state's 13 congres- sional districts, each of which chooses one person to the US House of Representatives. By tweaking the borders of those election districts, but not changing a single vote, Mattingly's maps show candidates from the Democratic Party winning six, seven or even eight seats in the race. In reality, they won only four – despite earning a majority of votes overall. “The mathematicians who want to save democracy,” Nature, Vol. 546, 8 June 2017 © 2017 Kwiple.com
Impeachment Moreover, even if a decisive majority of the American electorate does  awaken to the onset of tyranny, all it takes to block impeachment is enough support to sway thirty-four senators. Particularly in light of the Senate's unrepresentative composition, which gives small states an outsized voice in government, a president backed by less than 20 percent of registered votes can become practically immune to removal. Lawrence Tribe and Joshua Matz, To End a Presidency  © 2020 Kwiple.com
Impeachment There may indeed be proof enough for prosecutors of a future president's treason, bribery, or commission of a high crime or misdemeanor, but so long as a third of voters — or rather voters from a third of the states — tell their senators they remain unconvinced, conviction is hard to imagine. Jeffrey A. Engel, in Impeachment: An American History © 2019 Kwiple.com
Internet of things By 2020 there will be some 30bn devices connected to the internet and political power over the 8bn people on the planet will rest with the people who control those devices. Philip N. Howard, Pax Technica © 2017 Kwiple.com
Kwiplers say Amend the Constitution to make the District of Columbia a state © 2015 Kwiple.com
Kwiplers say Amend the Constitution to replace the electoral college with direct election of the president by popular vote © 2015 Kwiple.com
Kwiplers say Amend the Constitution to make Senators' votes proportional to their state's population as of the last census © 2015 Kwiple.com
Kwiplers say Inequality breeds corruption © 2018 Kwiple.com
Kwiplers say Inequality is man-made by men with vested interests © 2015 Kwiple.com
Markets A market economy inevitably and frequently inflicts serious harm on some citizens. By producing great inequalities in resources among citizens, market capitalism also fosters political inequality among the citizens of a democratic country. Robert A. Dahl, On Political Equality © 2018 Kwiple.com
Money in politics I'm against very wealthy people attempting to or influencing elections. But as long as it's doable, I'm going to do it. Sheldon Adelson, who does it to the tune of about $100,000,000 per election © 2015 Kwiple.com
Money in politics In order to achieve the widest possible distribution of political power, financial contributions to political campaigns should be made should be made by individuals alone. I see no reason for labor unions – or corporations – to participate in politics. Barry Goldwater, Conscience of a Conservative © 2019 Kwiple.com
Pluralism The flaw in the pluralist heaven is that the heavenly chorus sings with a strong upper-class accent. E. E. Schattschneider, The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America © 2021 Kwiple.com
Polarization This is the key to the future of the United States as a political entity. The polarization is geographical. Americans with different politics are moving farther away from each other physically as well as ideologically. The separation feeds back into the political system. More states become single-party states, like California and Texas. Ideological unity replaces open debates. The geography of the national government, and  the way it apportions power, becomes distorted. Huge geographical inequalities are baked into the system of government, which is, after all, nearly 250 years old. Sixty-two senators  represent one quarter of the American population. Six senators represent another quarter. Stephen Marche, The Next Civil War  [2022] © 2022 Kwiple.com
Political inequality In 1790, a voter in Delaware (the least populous state) had about thirteen times more influence in the U.S. Senate than a voter in the most populous state, Virginia. In 2000, by contrast, a voter in Wyoming has neary seventy times more influence in the U.S. Senate than a voter from California. What began as a strictly small -state bias has become a rural -state bias. Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, Tyranny of the Minority  © 2023 Kwiple.com
Political inequality According to research by David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report, an electoral-analysis site, even if Democrats won the national vote by six percentage points over a six-year cycle, they would probably still be a minority in both houses. Economist, July 12, 2018 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality As of the census of 2010, the five most rural states wielded about 50% more electoral votes, and three times as many senators, per resident as the five most urban ones did. Economist, July 12, 2018 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality At no time during the twenty-first century have Senate Republicans represented a majority of the U.S. population. Based on state populations, Senate Democrats have continuously represented more Americans since 1999. Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, Tyranny of the Minority  © 2023 Kwiple.com
Political inequality [B]ecause the governing coalition will generally include representatives from minority parties, governing majorities are likely to be more inclusive than in a majoritarian system. Thus, a proportional system comes closer than a majoritarian system to providing equal representation –an[d] equal say–for all. Robert A. Dahl, How Democratic Is the American Constitution?  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality By my calculation every currently serving Democratic senator represents roughly 3.65 million people; every Republican roughly 2.51 million. Put another way, the fifty senators from the twenty-five least populous states – twenty-nine of them Republicans – represent just over 16 percent of the American population, and thirty-four Republican senators – enough to block conviction  on impeachment charges – represent states with a total of 21 percent of the American population. Christopher R. Browning, “The Suffocation of Democracy” © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality … by 2040, 70 percent of the American population will live in fifteen states. Thirty percent of the population will live in thirty-five states. Think about what this means. That widely distributed 30 percent will be disproportionately white, dispropor- tionately nonurban, disproportionately older than fifty years of age. They will control seventy seats in the US Senate, enough to override a presidential veto. If they all support the same candidate for president, that candidate will begin every election with 40-vote head start in the 538-vote Electoral College. The 30 percent who live in thirty-five states are only three states short of the num- ber necessary to amend the US Constitution. David Frum, Trumpocalypse  © 2020 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Can we forget for whom we are forming a government? Is it for men  or for  the imaginary beings called States?  James Wilson, representing Pennsylvania at the  Constitutional Convention of 1787, objecting to creating the Senate because it institutionalizes unequal representation [Unfortunately, he and Roger Sherman proposed the Three Fifths Compromise, which counted slaves as 3/5 of a person]  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Congress shall have the Power … To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the United States Constitution © 2015 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State Amendment XXIII of the United States Constitution © 2015 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: — The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 and Amendment XII of the United States Constitution © 2015 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The extent and nature of representational inequalities reflect the degree of democracy in a given society, and when inequalities in political influence become too large, democracy shades into oligarchy (rule by the few) or plutocracy (rule by the wealthy). Martin Gilens, Affluence and Influence  © 2017 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The fifty Republican Senators represent  a population that comprises approximately forty-one million fewer citizens than the Democrats represent. Mary Trump, The Reckoning  [2021] © 2021 Kwiple.com
Political inequality  Four of nine current Supreme Court justices — Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — were confirmed by a Senate majority that collectively won a minority of the popular vote in Senate elections and represented less than half of the American population. And three of them — Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett — were also nominated by a president who lost the popular vote. Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, Tyranny of the Minority  © 2023 Kwiple.com
Political inequality History has dehypotheticalized Hamilton's angry worry [in Federalist #22 about the potential for minority rule]; the twenty-six smallest states, whose fifty-two representatives make up a majority in the Senate, speak for just 18% of the population. Jordan Ellenberg, Shape [2021] © 2022 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The House of Representatives is more balanced [than the Senate], but even there Democrats can win a majority of votes and end up with fewer seats. The Economist's own model suggests that Democrats need to win by seven points to have a greater than 50% chance of gaining a majority in the House. Gerrymandering is partly to blame. But the Democratic vote is also ineffi- cient: its candidates pile up votes in districts they win by a landslide. The Republican vote is more thinly spread, so its candidates can win more seats with fewer votes. The Economist, July 12, 2018 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality If exact equality of influence is not a plausible aim, what else might political equality mean concretely? One answer is this: a roughly equal likelihood of getting the policy that serves one's interests. If one loses, it is not because one's interests are systematically neglected (let alone that one's standing in the polity is systematically undermined); rather, it was tough luck that one lost this round. In other words, loss does not equal evidence of systematic disadvantage or of lack of standing. Jan-Werner Müller, Democracy Rules © 2021 Kwiple.com
Political inequality If we were to formulate a general principle and apply it fairly, would not  those most entitled to protection be the least privileged  minorities – rather than those who happen to live in the smallest states? Robert A. Dahl, How Democratic Is the American Constitution?  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality [I]n America's political system winning votes and winning office are not the same thing. Federal elections give more power to rural voters than to urban or suburban ones. When it comes to picking a president, California has one electoral-college vote per 720,000 people. In Wyoming the ratio is one per 190,000. The disparity is much greater in the Sen- ate, since California (population 39.5m) and Wyoming (population 580,000) both elect two senators. The Economist, July 12, 2018 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality In an August 2019 op-ed in defense of the legislative filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell  invoked the authority of Thomas Jefferson: “great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities.” But as it is, even great  majorities are prevented from pursuing even small  innovations. As of 2018, the fifty states and the Dis- trict of Columbia were home together to 327 million people. A law passed by Sena- tors representing 290.4 million of them can effectively be vetoed by Senators re- presenting 36.6 million … or 11 percent. David Frum, Trumpocalypse  © 2020 Kwiple.com
Politial inequality In the age of Trump, Democrats have developed a great sense of pride in their role protecting America's frayed democratic norms.  But there may come  a moment when the euphoria of a better-than-expected midterm election is only a memory and the sense of righteous virtue that comes from defending democracy begins to wear thin. When that day arrives, many of the voters who who make up the party's base and a majority of the country … might find that it is no longer tolerable to be ruled by a dwindling and overempowered minority. There is only so much satisfaction to be drawn from being the sole party with an unblemished record of dutifully surrendering power. Alexander Burns, New York Review of Books, January 19, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
Political inequality In the current Senate, Democratic senators represent more than  forty million more people than Republicans. And yet the Senate is evenly divided between the two parties. That means that Republicans are hugely favored to hold the Senate in future elections, regardless of whether the voters prefer Democratic control. And the GOP control of the Senate will give the Republicans the power to block any Democratic judicial nominations and the power to block legislation writing federal regulations into a statute. Ian Milhiser, The Agenda  [2021] © 2021 Kwiple.com
Political inequality In the past three House elections, Republicans' share of House seats has been 4-5 percentage points greater than their share of the two-party vote. In 2012 they won a comfortable 54% of the chamber despite receiving fewer votes than their Democratic opponents; in 2014 they converted a 51% two-party-vote share into 55% of the seats. Economist, July 12, 2018 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality In theory, senators representing just 16 per cent of America's population could hold sway over the US Senate within a generation. On present course, almost all are likely to be Republican. With 750,000 people, North Dakota has one senator per 375,000 people. With 40m, California has one representing every 20m. It would take a two-thirds majority of each chamber and three-quarters of the states to approve a constitutional amendment. The chances that Republicans will agree to alter the rules are close to zero. It would be like turkeys voting for Thanksgiving. Edward Luce, Financial Times, November 9, 2018 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality In 2020, the twenty-six states with the smallest populations control the majority of votes in the Senate while representing only 18 percent of the U.S. population. “Our Common Purpose: Reinventing American Democracy for the 21st Century,” Commission on the Practice of Democratic Citizenship © 2022 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The main reason, perhaps the only real reason, why second chambers exist in all federal systems is to preserve and protect unequal  representation. That is, they exist primarily to ensure that the representatives of small units cannot be readily outvoted by the representatives of large units. In a word, they are designed to construct a barrier to majority rule at the national level. Robert A. Dahl, How Democratic Is the American Constitution?  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality A majority of votes in the Senate can be cast by Senators representing less than 15 percent of the voters. Thus a policy preferred by the representatives of 85 percent of the voters could be vetoed by the representatives of 15 percent of the voters. Robert A. Dahl, On Political Equality [1952 election results] © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Many Americans no doubt view the costs of spending time and effort to reduce inequalities in political resources as too high precisely because they view the benefits as low or nonexistent. The absence of perceived benefits to be gained from reducing inequalities in the distribution [of] resources may be more important to them than the relatively high cost of political struggle. In short, the costs of struggle exceed the gains. Robert A. Dahl, On Political Equality © 2017 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Many people find it odd that voters in small, sparsely populated states seem to have more “voting power” than people in large, densely populated states. As an example, about 553,000 eligible voters in North Dakota get three electoral votes, or one elector per 177,666 voters, roughly, while California's much larger electorate of about 23.6 million eligible voters gets fifty-five electoral votes, or about one for every 429,455 votes. Richard M. Valelly, American Politics [copyrighted 2013] [429,455 / 177,666 = 2.42] [2.42 is criminally beyond “1 man 1 vote”] © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality No iron rule in American politics says an electoral majority greatly disadvantaged by the country's political institutions has to operate with effusive respect for them.  A Democratic presidential candidate who  wins the popular vote and loses the Electoral College — like Hillary Clinton and Al Gore — is not bound by law to concede promptly. A popular president constrained by the Senate's rural majority does not have to keep private his view that the institution is obsolete. Alexander Burns, New York Review of Books, January 19, 2023 © 2023 Kwiple.com
Political inequality On Tuesday, according to The Times, Democratic Senate candidates garnered 45 million votes, and Republicans just 33 million (57 percent to 42 percent). Yet, the Republicans will gain perhaps three seats. That is not democracy.  Michael Tomasky, New York Times, November 7, 2018 © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The present Republican Senate majority, which fast-tracked a third Supreme Court Justice to confirmation at a time when 60m had already cast their vote, represents 15m fewer Americans than the Democratic senators on whom they impenitently imposed their will. Sooner or later, these institutional anomalies will be redefined as gross injustices. Simon Schama, Financial Times, October 30, 2020 © 2020 Kwiple.com
Political inequality A Quinnipiac University poll just before the Senate vote on whether to allow witnesses in Trump's impeachment trial found that 75% of registered voters favored having witnesses   Census Bureau   Census Bureau   estimated 2019   estimated 2019 Sen- population Sen- population ators represented ators represented voting by Senators voting by Senators “Yes” voting “Yes” “No” voting “No” ==== ========= ==== ========= 49 172,132,319 51 155,401,455 49% 52.55% 51% 47.45% ==== ========= ==== ========= Blow me down! The Senate thwarts the will of the majority! © 2020 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Running directly counter to political equality is a fundamental law governing human nature and human society: Political resources, knowledge, skills and incentives are always  and everywhere distributed unequally. Robert A. Dahl, On Political Equality © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years, and each Senator shall have one Vote. Article I, Section 3, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution (Amendment XVII provided for choosing Senators by popular election) © 2015 Kwiple.com
Political inequality That year [2018 in Wisconsin], Democrats swept all five statewide races and won 53 percent of votes cast for the state asembly, but the party retained just 36 percent of seats in the chamber. … in 2021 … the number of GOP-leaning seats in the state assembly has increased from 61 to 63 out of 99 and from 21 to 23 out of 33 seats in the state senate. Democrats would have to win the statewide vote by 12 points just to get to 50 seats in the assembly. Ari Berman, Mother Jones, October 25, 2022 [Apparently, Republicans there think "Wisconsin" is Algonquian for "gerrymander"] © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Today … Republicans are predominantly the party of sparsely populated regions,  while Democrats are the party of the cities. As a result, the Constitution's small-state bias, which became a rural  bias in the twentieth century, has become a partisan bias in the twentieth-first century. We are experiencing our own form of “creeping counter-majoritarianism.” Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, Tyranny of the Minority  © 2023 Kwiple.com
Political inequality The unequal accumulation of political  resources points to an ominous possibility: political inequalities may be ratcheted up, so to speak, to a level from which they cannot be ratcheted down. The cumulative advantages in power, influence, and authority of the more privileged strata may become so great that even if less privileged Americans compose a majority of citizens they are simply unable, and perhaps even unwill- ing, to make the effort it would require to overcome the forces of inequality arrayed against them. Robert A. Dahl, On Political Equality © 2017 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Unequal representation in the Senate has unquestionably failed to protect the fundamental interests of the least  privileged minorities. On the contrary, unequal representation has sometimes served to protect the interests of the most  privileged minorities. An obvious case is the protection of the rights of slaveholders rather than the rights of their slaves. Robert A. Dahl, How Democratic Is the American Constitution?  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Political inequality [T]he unequal social class makeup of our political institutions affects who wins and who loses in the policy-making process. Like ordinary Americans, lawmakers from different classes tend to think, vote, and advocate differently on economic issues. The numerical underrepresentation of the working class in our legislatures consequenly skews economic policy- making toward outcomes that are more in line with what more privileged Americans want. Nicholas Carnes, White-Collar Government © 2019 Kwiple.com
Political inequality Wisconsin's legislative maps drawn in 2011, protected Republican supermajorities even after Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, was defeated last year. Republican candidates for the State Assembly won just 46 percent of the popular vote, but they captured 64 percent of the chamber's seats. New York Times, January 3, 2019 © 2019 Kwiple.com
Populism A final and I believe valid ethical objection to the theory of populist democracy is that it postulates only two goals to be maximized — political equality and popular sovereignty. Yet no one, except perhaps a fanatic, wishes to maximize two goals at the expense of all others. … Political equality and popular sovereignty are not absolute goals; we must ask ourselves how much leisure, privacy, consensus, stability, income, security, progress, status and probably many other goals we are prepared to forego for an additional increment of political equality. Robert A. Dahl, A Preface to Democratic Theory  © 2018 Kwiple.com
Post-2014 Senate shituation 13 states (Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Wyoming) 2014 population: 35,432,696 Senators: 26 Republicans 1 Senator per 1,362,796 people — 1 state (California) 2014 population: 38,332,521 Senators: 2 Democrats 1 Senator per 19,166,261 people 19,166,261 / 1,362,796 = 14, therefore: average 13er's vote is worth 14 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth 7% of an average 13er's — 1 state (Wyoming) 2014 population = 582,658, therefore: 1 Senator per 291,329 Wyomians, a Wyomian's vote is worth 66 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth 1.5% of a Wyomian's © 2015 Kwiple.com
Post-2016 Senate shituation 14 states (Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming) 2016 population: 38,597,448 Senators: 28 Republicans 1 Senator per 1,378,480 people — 1 state (California) 2016 population: 38,802,500 Senators: 2 Democrats 1 Senator per 19,401,250 people 19,401,250 / 1,378,480 = 14, therefore: average 14er's vote is worth 14 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth 7% of an average 14er's — 1 state (Wyoming) 2016 population = 584,153, therefore: 1 Senator per 292,077 Wyomians, a Wyomian's vote is worth 66 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth 1.5% of a Wyomian's © 2016 Kwiple.com
Post-2018 Senate shituation 15 states (Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming) 2018 population: 40,056,961 Senators: 30 Republicans 1 Senator per 1,335,232 people — 1 state (California) 2018 population: 39,776,830 Senators: 2 Democrats 1 Senator per 19,888,415 people 19,888,415 / 1,335,232 = 16, therefore: average 15er's vote is worth 16 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth 6% of an average 15er's — 1 state (Wyoming) 2018 population = 573,720, therefore: 1 Senator per 286,860 Wyomians, a Wyomian's vote is worth 69 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth 1.4% of a Wyomian's © 2016 Kwiple.com
Post-2020 Senate shituation 15 states (Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming) 2020 population: 40,085,414 Senators: 30 Republicans 1 Senator per 1,336,180 people — 1 state (California) 2020 population: 39,368,075 Senators: 2 Democrats 1 Senator per 19,684,037 people 19,684,037 / 1,336,180 = 14.7, therefore: average 15er's vote is worth nearly 15 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth less than 7% of an average 15er's — 1 state (Wyoming) 2020 population = 582,328, therefore: 1 Senator per 291,164 Wyomians, a Wyomian's vote is worth 68 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth 1.5% of a Wyomian's  © 2021 Kwiple.com
Post-2022 Senate shituation 15 states (Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming) 2020 population: 40,737,128 Senators: 30 Republicans 1 Senator per 1,357,904 people — 1 state (California) 2022 population: 39,995,077 Senators: 2 Democrats 1 Senator per 19,997,539 people 19,997,539 / 1,357,904 = 14.7, therefore: average 15er's vote is worth nearly 15 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth less than 7% of an average 15er's — 1 state (Wyoming) 2022 population = 579,495, therefore: 1 Senator per 289,748 Wyomians, a Wyomian's vote is worth 69 times a Californian's, a Californian's vote is worth 1.4% of a Wyomian's  © 2023 Kwiple.com
Republican Party Republican moderates are up against the structural vagaries of US politics.  The system's counter-majoritarian features allow the party to remain competitive and powerful without appealing far outside its base. … Wyoming’s 600,000 people cancel out California's 40m in the Senate. Nothing here is improper. The constitution was never meant to privilege raw tonnage of votes. But it does mean Republicans do not face the same incentive — moderate or perish — that  keeps parties honest in some other democracies. To get anywhere, reform-minded Republicans must petition their colleagues' consciences, not their interests. Even to write that sentence is to sigh at the hopelessness of the errand. Janan Ganesh, Financial Times, Jan. 12, 2021 © 2021 Kwiple.com
Republican Party motto Perfecting minority rule since 1971 citation 1971 is the year Lewis Powell was appointed to the Supreme Court after authoring the Powell Manifesto encouraging business executives to strangle progtressivism by creating front organizations to infiltrate and capture campuses, Congress, courts, government and the media © 2015 Kwiple.com
Republicans say Passing laws by rubber-stamping bills written for us by corporate lobbyists is change we believe in © 2017 Kwiple.com
Republicans say People with the deepest pockets deserve the loudest voices © 2015 Kwiple.com
The Senate Because of the way the modern Senate has has evolved, combined with the trends of of polarization and negative partisanship that have shaped America, this faction [of  wealthy white anti-choice conservatives] is able to wield power far out of proportion to its numbers. The modern Senate gives it the power to exercise a veto over policies backed by a majority of the population and makes likely that it will have the power do so in perpetuity. This is not just a minority. This is a superminority. Adam Jentleson, Kill Switch © 2021 Kwiple.com
The Senate By reference to the one person, one vote standard, the Senate is the most malapportioned legislature in the world. Frances E. Lee and Bruce Oppenheimer, Sizing Up the Senate © 2021 Kwiple.com
The Senate The Senate hasn't simply favored sparsely populated states; politicians in Washington created sparsely populated states to leverage the Senate's skewed power. New York Times, November 21, 2016 © 2016 Kwiple.com
The Senate The Senate is intentionally a very malapportioned legislature. Richard M. Valelly, American Politics © 2018 Kwiple.com
Sleepers at the wheel say One man, one vote – it's what America's all about © 2016 Kwiple.com
State of the union c The “deep state” of c right-wing billionaires with their money, think tanks, institutes and foundations; financial and industrial elites with their money and “revolving door” roles as regulators ensuring regulatory capture; and the military-intelligence bureaucracy with its money and cost-plus contractors c rules from behind the scenes regardless of who's elected © 2016 Kwiple.com
State of the union  Everybody knows the game's been rigged © 2015 Kwiple.com
State of the union c Labor can't strike, but capital goes on investment strikes by threatening to move if its demands for wage cuts, tax cuts, subsidies, negligent regulatory regimes, union-free workplaces and judicial toadies aren't met © 2017 Kwiple.com
State of the union The “people” Congress represents AbbVie Allergan Altria Amazon Amgen Annheuser-Busch Apple Bank of America Berkshire Hathaway BP CEMEX Chevron China Mobile Cisco Citigroup Coca Cola Comcast CVS Caremark Exxon Mobil Facebook General Electric Gilead Sciences Home Depot IBM Intel Johnson & Johnson JPMorganChase Medtronic Merck Microsoft Novartis Oracle Pepsico PetroChina Pfizer Philip Morris Proctor & Gamble Royal Dutch Shell Taiwan Semiconductor Total Unilever UnitedHealth Group Verizon Visa Wal-Mart Walt Disney Wells Fargo Thanks, Citizens United © 2015 Kwiple.com
Supreme Court [I]n the recent view of a majority on the U.S. Supreme Court, democratic responsiveness need not mean responding to all citizens equally. It can mean responding unequally, giving special weight to people or corporations that spend large amounts of money. Benjamin Page and Martin Gilens, Democracy in America?  [2017] © 2019 Kwiple.com
Voter suppression I had to put the $42 where it would do the most good. We couldn't eat the birth certificate. An elderly African-American Texas woman living on a monthly income of $321 who was disenfranchised because she couldn't afford to pay for a copy of her birth certificate, which Texas requires to get a voter ID Quoted in The Great Suppression, by Zachary Roth © 2016 Kwiple.com
Voting rights Five unelected Supreme Court justices dis-  mantled an unmistakingly democratizing law,  the VRA [Voting Rights Act], which had been passed and renewed on muitiple occasions.  In 2019, when efforts to restore the VRA were blocked by a Republican Senate majority, that majority represented seven million fewer voters than the Senate Democratic minority that backed it. In January 2022,  when majorities in both houses of Congress  — and more than 60 percent of Americans — backed voting rights legislation, it was blocked by a minority in the Senate. Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, Tyranny of the Minority  © 2023 Kwiple.com
Wealth inequality Economic inequality begets political inequality, which, in turn, makes it harder to address economic inequality. Benjamin Page and Martin Gilens, Democracy in America? © 2019 Kwiple.com
 
Wealth inequality [W]ealthy Americans wield a lot of influence. By investing money in politics, they can turn economic power into political power. Thus the United States suffers from what can be called “unequal democracy.” Benjamin Page and Martin Gilens, Democracy in America? © 2019 Kwiple.com