Skip to main content

Wake up, independent America

While listening to an episode of The Gist recently, I was shocked to hear Mark Lilla make the statement that Republicans need only win complete control of two more state governments in order to call a constitutional convention.  You read that right.  In case you weren't aware, the Republican party currently holds complete control in 32 of the state governments.  This is from Wikipedia:

Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution, also called an Article V Convention, or Amendments Convention, called for by two-thirds (currently 34) of the state legislatures...

Once that threshold of 34 states is reached, they can call a convention to amend the US Constitution.  That should strike fear into the hearts and minds of any red-blooded, freedom-loving American.  According to Gallup, as of September the US breaks down into 29% R, 30% D, and 40% Independent.  Either party gaining such power in the state governments that they can call a convention to change the very fabric of our greatest governing document in a day and age when a plurality of voters doesn't identify itself with either of the major parties is a frightening prospect.  A majority of the people being ruled by a minority group seldom works out well.  They even write novels and musicals about it.  I'm looking at you Victor Hugo, Claude-Michel Schönberg, and Alan Boublil!

We all know that in the 2016 election the candidate for the Democrats won about 3 million more popular votes, yet still lost the election to the Republican candidate.  What gets overlooked is that roughly 6 million more people voted for Democrat candidates for Senate than for Republican candidates.  In the House, Republicans received 49.9% of the votes, but 55.2% of the seats.  This is a trending problem.

I understand the geography of it.  It is not lost on me that more land mass is inhabited by people who vote for Republican candidates.  Nor is it lost on me that our system is set up in order to ensure some representational equality for a bygone era.  We no longer are tethered to the town or city in which we were born.  We have the option of going off to the big city, to the coast, to the farmland, to the mountains, or wherever our heart desires.  Therefore, people who are born in the country but sympathize with city-dwellers can take their vote and their influence off to the urban area of their choice.  By the same token, the city-born who identifies with rural ideals can leave and start farming, selling, trading in whatever area of the country they would like.

Neither way of life is inherently better than the other.  They are just different.  At the time our system for selecting representation was constructed, people stayed, for the most part, and bloomed with their political ideologies wherever they happened to have been planted.  That allowed for the opportunity for equal representation and the opportunity for red and blue to live side by side and have purple children, neighbors who might help them see the other side of the coin, and co-workers who might be influenced in a debate by their own insight. 

We don't live this way anymore.  Sadly, we can choose exactly the influence we want to have swaying our thoughts.  Democrats tend to move to, or stay in, cities while Republicans tend stay in, or move to, the country.  The nation is becoming imbalanced and when you look at the maps here, you will see that the trend is to an ever-redder heartland. 

This undoubtedly thrills at least 29% of Americans.  It undoubtedly terrifies 30% of Americans.  It's the 40% in the middle who need to understand that if one party gains control of enough land they can determine the future of government in America.   At that point, there will be roughly 70% of Americans whose opinions will be at the very least uninteresting to those in power.  At worst, the opinions of the 70% could be suppressed, muted, or even criminalized. 

So, to the independents in the heartland I say WAKE UP!

To the Democratic leadership I say, WAKE UP and get it together!  It can not be allowed to happen that a party which stands for supporting the workers, providing a helping hand to the unemployed, providing medical service for those among us who need it but can't quite afford it, and which garners more votes than its opponents be outmaneuvered and boxed out of any opportunity to have a voice in governing the country in which they live.

To Democrats in the heartland I implore you to be courageous and talk with your Republican neighbors.  Invite them over for cake and discuss, like grown-ups, the issues in the world today.  Do whatever you can to have civil discourse to influence the understanding of those in your circle of influence.  It is only in pursuing this sort of equality in representation that we can insure "that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

All for one?

Yesterday I was in a union meeting.  Among other things, a brief discussion was had about the evolution of individual contracts versus group contracts in particular among ballet and theater companies, not necessarily on the opera side of things.  It was pointed out that the movement began primarily because more and more dancers wanted to be seen as soloists in the troupe rather than "ensemble dancers", and they wanted to negotiate their own contracts accordingly.  Over time that has led to less negotiating power for dancers, ultimately developing into much lower pay, often the legal minimum salary for dancers. That led me to connect the dots between that devolution of solidarity in the ranks of ballet troupes where each had been a part of the braided fabric, strong and durable, to the political devolution we're starting to see around the world.  For some time now, countries have been murmuring about wanting out of the EU.  Granted, there are positives and nega...

A letter to Rachel

I just wrote this letter to Rachel Maddow. Hi Rachel, and her team, (Disclaimer: I wanted to write something shorter and more to the point, but this wound up being shaped in my mind like one of your A-blocks, with a somewhat-random-and-seemingly-out-of-the-blue starting point that comes around to underscore the point that is being crafted for the end just before the break.  Please understand that as you start this.) While I love to laugh and know the value of laughter to help us through tough times, I have been frustrated on occasion with the laughter that happens on any number of news shows when describing our illustrious President's behavior.  Don't get me wrong, I understand that things are so bizarre for normal, rational people that it seems uncomfortable and inconceivable that someone would act the way he acts, and so we laugh.  However, it is my opinion and belief that serious times and serious actions call for serious people and serious responses.  ...

Give an Inch to Gain a Mile

Imagine with me, if you will, a non-railed causeway that is just  wide enough for two cars to pass. Now imagine that you are driving a car on that causeway when you look up and see another car coming at you.  You need to get to the other side.  They need to get to the other side.  It seems scary and dangerous to move over.  There's no railing, and a precipitous drop into the water awaits if you go too far.  As I see it, there are five options: 1) Back up until you get to the start of the causeway so that the other car can get past you and out of your way. 2) Force the other driver to back up until you can get past him. 3) Sit there bumper to bumper and don't go anywhere. 4) Try to shove the other car off the causeway. 5) Carefully move to the side while the other driver does the same in order to provide space for both cars to get where they're going. Options 1 and 2 put one of the drivers in the position that they might encounter the same situatio...