In a Vote by 2/3 the Ayes Have IT?? What??

YouTube Preview Image


  1. Why should the nomination process work any differently than the actual election process? This is yet another argument in favor of abolishing the electoral college. When dissenting voices are purposefully and systematically eliminated from the democratic process entirely, only the illusion of democracy remains.

    Our founding fathers, despite being lauded as heroes of the “every man”, purposely created a system to benefit them – wealthy, powerful, WHITE businessmen. Let’s not forget, after all, that slaves were considered only 3/5ths human… which, at the time, was considered by some to be “generous”. Our founding fathers were under no legal or, at that time anyway, moral obligation to recognize those slaves as human beings at all. What nice guys! Oh, wait…

    Stop and think, for just a moment, about what that their goals truly were. In the system they created, if you’re a wealthy slave owner who owns 100 slaves, your vote counts for far more in the grand scheme of things than a vote cast by an individual who owns no slaves. Sounds crazy, right? That’s because it is.

    Without slaves that count as 3/5ths of a “person”, states whose populations did not own slaves (or didn’t own as many slaves, at least) were entitled to fewer representatives in the House. Those pesky Yankees and all that “it’s wrong to own human beings” nonsense didn’t carry much weight. While the House now caps the number of members at 435, back then states were entitled to one representative per 30,000 people. Do the math.

    Nevermind. I’ll do it for you. Let’s say a state had 110,000 potentially eligible adult voters, but 100,000 of them were slaves. See:

    100,000 x 3/5 = 60,000 = 2 additional House representatives

    Here’s the rub… in that slave state, an individual vote actually counts as 1.66 votes vs. 1 vote from someone in a non-slave state. By inflating the population of slave states, but not actually allowing the majority of that population to vote, you put the power exclusively in the hands of an incredibly small minority of the overall population of that state. Not only that, by increasing the number of representatives those states were then entitled to at the Federal level, rich, white men all but secured their position as the singular legislative voice of the entire nation.

    By increasing the number of representatives slave states were entitled to, our founding fathers gave themselves more power over the legislative process than the citizens of non-slave states could ever hope to have collectively. Injustice, inequality and preferential treatment for the white & wealthy were built into our Constitution from the start. It’s all a game, silly… a game built by wealthy white men to benefit wealthy white men. And it has been from the beginning.

    Rich, old, white men have been tilting the playing field in their favor from this nation’s very inception. People simply deny or refuse to acknowledge the parts of our history that don’t support the “RAH-RAH” version of how America came to be a nation and that the same men who systematically & purposefully tried to exterminate Native Americans are the same men who drafted our nation’s founding documents.

    We will continue to repeat the same barbaric and embarrassingly small-minded history until we acknowledge it and make equally purposeful efforts to end that cycle of power-grabbing, unmitigated avarice and self-righteousness. That starts by forcing out of office the elected officials whose allegiance is not to justice, freedom or equality, but to bringing back an era in which old, rich, white men are the only ones whose rights are inalienable.

    {{end rant}} :)

  2. James O. Ogle [Free Parliamentary] says:

    2/3rds vote is bogus, because it allows 1/3 to dictate to the much larger majority. I’ve always felt that this was added by the writers of Robert’s Rules of Order to entice the power-loving status quo to use their rules and control the majority on crucial votes.

    I am for a simple majority, 50% plus one vote. It’s a very basic truth and foundation to democracy that’s currently being abused by the Gs, Ls and Ds. Probably the Rs too, although I haven’t actually witnessed it.

    If you want to use an advanced voting system, you might want to consider the most mathematically known, the Sainet-Lague parliament seat distribution system, Hagenbach-Bischoff method.

    To base any movement or political decision-making on anything less, will result in dysfunctions and self-destruction.

    Check out the 9th USA Parliament, we’ve used such a system for 17 years and it works very good: