3 ms·
Sorry, I meant Andrew Johnson. He kept vetoing progressive bills, opposed the 14th amendment, etc. Rutherford B. Hayes was horrible too, since he was the one w
by winter_blue 4y ago
Sorry, I meant Andrew Johnson. He kept vetoing progressive bills, opposed the 14th amendment, etc.
Rutherford B. Hayes was horrible too, since he was the one who pulled federal troops out of the South (who were there to protect non-white people's voting rights).
Honestly, the Southern states should never have been admitted back into the Union _as states_, but should rather have been annexed back as territories (with no federal representation). Abolitionists admitted those states back under the theory that blacks voting would result in progressive folks being elected.
But we're still paying the price of that foresight today. If the southern states were territories, Trump & Bush would never have won, the Congress would have been a highly-progressive for the past two decades, etc. Honestly, even today it might be an improvement if these southern states just formed their own country, but with a free-trade and currency-sharing treaty with the rest of the US.
- scarface74 4y agoThe issues are the electoral college, two senators per state regardless of population and gerrymandering. If we truly had “one person one vote”, most of these problems would be solved
- selimthegrim 4y ago1) multiple member constituencies for minority districts might actually solve a lot of problems 2) there is an section in the 14th amendment which allows states’ electoral votes and their Congressional representation to be zeroed out if they don’t play nice (basically the same as territories)
- winter_blue 4y agoRe: 2) The amendment says: “the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.” Not zero out, but rather reduce. Regardless, the conservative SCOTUS would never enforce this anyways.