Are they also going to amend the supremacy clause?
Watch Missouri lose a member of Congress due to 2020 reapportionment. That would be justice.
State legislators, taking active measures to reduce their state’s representation at the federal level, in order to gain partisan advantage at the state level.
The next Kansas.
Of all the states I’ve lived in (and there are several), Missouri was the crookedest of them, largely due to the Missouri GOP. Eric Greitens was a perfect embodiment of the Missouri GOP.
Guess this “one person, one vote” frame is the new talking point from Luntz, and will be paraded as relentlessly as"death tax."
It’s hard not to get weary after what-- 20 years? – of this march of small-scale evils in pursuit of officially killing democracy while positioning the body so Democrats will get framed for the deed.
Blatantly unconstitutional, as they will learn.
Unless Kavanaugh and Gorsuch get their day.
Apparently, the Founding Fathers required EVERYONE be counted for absolutely no reason.
Doesn’t this mean they will lose Congressional representation? I know racism keeps them warm at night, but this does seem a bit ridiculous …
Please proceed, Governor … ?
Nah. The Fascist Five Fix is in. This is the GOP’s wet dream coming true.
The plain language of the US Constitution doesn’t allow any wiggle room here.
Stop giving those assholes power they do not possess.
Bullshit, and you know it.
As I just posted, the plain language of the US Constitution doesn’t have any wiggle room on the subject.
I think the point here is that the don’t give a fuck and will decide it whatever way they want, irrespective of the plain language of the Constitution or stare decisis.
That may have been your point, but it’s wrong.
Roberts is too concerned with his legacy to go along with anything of the sort.
I hope you’re right, and that I’m just a grousing pessimist. I’ve just felt like the Looking Glass moment really was Bush v. Gore, with its “you can’t use this as precedent.” They don’t have the power, but can/will they take it anyway? If you can’t enforce the norms and agreements by which we’re bound and you have actors ready to demolish them, what happens?
Legacy ceases to be a concern when you perceive yourself being on the cusp of permanently securing who gets to write the history.
There are arguments on each side, but one thing Roberts has always been very VERY clear on: he despises things like affirmative action and what could be more affirmative actiony than counting people who can’t even vote to draw districts and distribute the federal government’s wealth collected from (allegedly) citizens only? He’s also proven himself to be extremely willing to rewrite reality to fit his anti-affirmative-action type views in service to the GOP retaining power via their dreamed-of minority-rules permanent white Christian hegemony. It’s why he helped eviscerate the VRA and told us there’s no more racism. I trust the “legacy” analysis as far as I can shit up a wall standing on my head.
That is an uninformed opinion, with zero evidence to back it up.
This is an insane idea!
Inhabitants or Residents regardless of status should be counted! Everyone must be represented!
Hell if Putin can interfere with our elections and nothing is done about it. Why not at least count every individual who lives on American soil?
Only dumb idiots would not understand that simple theory, because their main goal is to not include People of Color!
INSECURE WIMPS!
Gee, why don’t they just go ahead and say that only Republican party members in good standing are allowed to vote, and for good measure say they have to be white male property owners, just to throw in the “originalist” argument back in there. This is about as anti-democratic as it comes, and should wake the voters in Missouri up to the fact that Republicans don’t have their interests in mind at all. I somehow doubt it will though, the knee jerk reaction to vote Republican, plus the lies around the campaign for this proposal in 2020, will pass it through.
The consequence of this whole “one person one vote” malarkey that no one has noted yet is that it’s going to affect areas with more kids. If you’re basing your allocations only on registered voters, then support for kids goes out the window too…which probably looks great for selfish old people who want more money for their little town, and who don’t care that it will come at the expense of things kids need in the areas they live. Someone really should look into that aspect of things…it’s pretty easy to show a proposal is heartless if it ruins children’s lives.