4 ms·
> I can't think of any way to give people more say based on how long they've been invested in a place that couldn't also be trivially used for voter suppression
by ardy42 6y ago
> I can't think of any way to give people more say based on how long they've been invested in a place that couldn't also be trivially used for voter suppression.
I don't think something like that necessarily needs to be some kind of constitutional mechanism. It could be a social norm, kinda like the ones that discourage people from casually insulting others and which punish them if they do.
Though I suppose if you're looking for a constitutional mechanism, clearly defined but longish residency requirements for voting probably wouldn't fall under the category of "voter suppression" (which I take to mean policies designed to indirectly disenfranchise certain kinds of voters for partisan political advantage).
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago> clearly defined but longish residency requirements for voting probably wouldn't fall under the category of "voter suppression" (which I take to mean policies designed to indirectly disenfranchise certain kinds of voters for partisan political advantage). Until The Great Migration happens (or something like it), and suddenly the long residency requirements look precisely like racism ... unless, of course, you've had the in place for 300 years already. I think that voting is among the least significant of the acts of "new arrivals", particularly if they have money.