4 ms·
> And why do we give more voice to the rural vote? Sure they would be a minority otherwise, but so are left handed people and we don't give them more vote. The
by memling 4y ago
> And why do we give more voice to the rural vote? Sure they would be a minority otherwise, but so are left handed people and we don't give them more vote.
There are other minorities that we think a bit harder about than left handers. Consider, for example, that African Americans are approximately 12% of the US population.[1] They are not, however, evenly distributed around the United States. For example, they make up 33% of the population of Georgia and 22% in North Carolina,[2] states that crack the top 10 in US population.[3]
It took a bit of doing, but I weighted the electoral votes for all 50 states and DC (see [2]; you've got to issue your own queries to get them all) according to the percentage of African-American population (AAPC). For example, Alabama has nine electoral votes and an AAPC of 26.8%, which returns 2.412 adjusted votes.
In sum, African Americans account for 70.658 total electoral votes, about 13% of the total compared to their population representation of 12%. That step change is an 8% advantage relative to their total population (538*0.12 ~ 65 electoral votes; 1 - 65/71 ~ 8.45%).
This is not, I want to point out, an argument about racial inequality or the fitness of the electoral college to deliver solutions to those kinds of problems. Neither is it an exhaustive treatment (obviously) of every kind of demographic. There are obvious flaws in this approach (you can't split EC votes, EC votes are typically winner-take-all, not all of the population are voting age, etc., etc.). So it's also not intended to say, "Well, akshully..."
I do think, though, that there is some nuance that is missing here. Rural people aren't the only minority affected by the electoral college, and questions of geography and demography play important roles in how people vote. It's worth considering what happens when you are in the minority, because it is the rights of the minority that are most likely to be overrun by the majority.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States#2020_American_Community_Survey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_Unit...
[2]: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/GA,NC/PST045221 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/GA,NC/PST045221
[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population#State_and_territory_rankings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...
- jandrese 4y agoI'm not sure what your point is here? You are trying to calculate black voting power without even considering the longstanding and effective black voter suppression efforts in states like Georgia, so it's all academic anyway. Replacing tyranny of the majority with tyranny of the minority isn't a win.
- memling 4y ago> I'm not sure what your point is here? While the EC could "erode voting power" of the majority in favor of minorities we don't like, it may also favor those minorities we do like.
- jandrese 4y agoIt doesn't matter if I like the minority or not, singling them out for more political power makes no sense.
- memling 4y ago> It doesn't matter if I like the minority or not, singling them out for more political power makes no sense. It seems like as a society we have a complicated relationship with this idea. Rights are in principle equal, but power is not equally distributed. Maintaining any balance is a really hard problem. The electoral college could be a relic of a bygone era whose time is over and done, but I'm not sure that eliminating it is going to reset the balance of power in a way that protects rights more effectively.