WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 9, 2023
But what if it got 55?: For the record, you can argue that ballot initiatives should be harder to pass.
(If memory serves, such arguments center on the tendency of the electorate to approve contradictory ballot measures. If memory serve, the initiative-friendly state of California is often cited when such problems are discussed.)
On the other hand, the Ohio Republican Party was trying to play a sleazy old game with yesterday's failed ballot measure. There's nothing new about the old trick, but the logic goes like this:
Let's hold ballot measures, or primary elections, during the dog days of summer! The bulk of the voters won't show up, or even know that a vote's being held. That gives powerful elements within one party or the other a better chance to win.
Now for a quick trip down a logical hall of mirrors:
Yesterday, the Ohio GOP was staging a ballot measure designed to make it harder for future ballot measures to pass. If yesterday's ballot measure had passed, future measures would need 60% approval in order to pass.
As everyone knows, this was a last-ditch effort to pre-defeat a ballot measure this November supporting the right to have an abortion. With that fact in mind, Ohio voters defeated yesterday's measure, giving it only something like 43% of the vote.
Yesterday's ballot measure went down to defeat, 57-43. But just as a point of logic, riddle us this:
What if yesterday's measure had passed with (let's say) 55% of the vote? In that case, a measure requiring 60% of the vote would have passed with less than 60% of the vote!
On its face, that wouldn't exactly make perfect sense. Luckily, Ohio voters snuffed the whole darn thing.
Let's not get too far over our skis, and expect something the GOP did to make sense.
ReplyDeleteIt is in the same category as other right wing voter suppression methods.
DeleteI am doubly happy about the Ohio result. First of all, I am pro-choice. Second, I am in favor of ballot propositions. Yes, a lot of foolish decisions are made via such propositions, but the legislature is not so great either.
ReplyDeletego fuck yourself, David. you voted for the assclown who put 3 rightwing christofascists on the supreme court guaranteeing the ensuing chaos and dystopian hellscape women are dealing with now. you supported the abomination who literally promised this would happen.
DeleteI'm doubly happy about the Ohio result, too. Not only because i'm pro-choice, but also because I love when Republicans are forced to eat the shit sandwiches they try to foist on the citizens.
ReplyDelete"What if yesterday's measure had passed with (let's say) 55% of the vote? In that case, a measure requiring 60% of the vote would have passed with less than 60% of the vote!"
ReplyDeleteThere is nothing magic about 55% or 60% or less. When people decide on a rule for passing legislation, it is inherently arbitrary. It is a way of deciding an issue, not something grounded in logic or empirical evidence that 47% is a better number than 52% in terms of decision-making.
Why make an arbitrary rule? Because you have to decide things somehow. One way is to use a simple majority, but as Somerby points out, low-turnout elections can then impose rules on a non-voting majority, when might be undesirable if it leads to civil unrest among that majority (who will take it out on elected officials at some point). Beyond that, what is the "best" percentage to decide? Political scientists may have opinions about that. I doubt anyone proposing this legislation consulted any research before writing this proposed initiative. They just wanted to make it hard on abortion-supporters later on. But that is also not a good way to decide how to enact initiatives or put issues on the ballot.
Somerby's idea that this must be logical or it is somehow foolish or wrong, fails to consider anything about the topic except the comparison he describes. It is far from the only way to think about this, and his basis for deciding makes as little sense as any other, since there is not even a given that a majority must be involved at any point. And Somerby offered no justification for his complaint, which I suspect is based on prior experience and nothing to do with political science.
Engineering procedures for voting in order to produce specific legislative results strikes me as a poor reason to revise initiative rules. Only by leaving the rules the same can you tell how much support their is for one issue compared to another, especially over time. You need to keep the conditions for voting constant.
ReplyDeleteRemember when Somerby used to care about per person health care costs and how right wingers were scamming billions from the health care industrial complex.
ReplyDeleteHe’s come along way, baby
A new report from the House Oversight Committee claims that President Biden's family has received more than $20 million from foreign oligarchs.
DeleteIt's shocking to examine the contents of the laptop.
DeleteSomerby needs to examine why Biden lied to the public about his knowledge of the millions of dollars his family received from communist China and oligarchs in Ukraine.
DeleteDidn't you get the memo, Ivan? We're allowed to follow Donald J Chickenshit's business rules now.
DeleteDear Russian troll at 6:29,
DeleteYou might want to take that up with the Supreme Court, who says unless you have a signed contract where the $20 million Biden got from foreign oligarchs is spelled out as a bribe, it's not illegal.
BTW, if you know any Right-wing Americans who are upset about Biden getting $20 Million from foreign oligarchs, don't forget to ask them if the bed they made is comfortable.
It's weird Biden lied about.
Deleteit.
DeleteWe Democrats should probably draft some kind of formal apology to Trump supporters for going on incessantly about Trump's corruption when our guy is over the top.knee deep in foreign influence peddling with communists and other unsavory governments
DeleteI was going to ask them to formally make the charges of corruption against Biden in a court of law, but they all have the same amnesia problem, when put under oath.
DeletePro- tip: You're going to need to cure the amnesia problem, if you want to tackle corruption.
No evidence Bidn has done anything corrupt. Saying doesn’t make it so.
Delete