We should all work together instead of being divisive
letter to the editor
To the Editor:
This is a response to a letter writer’s opinion piece published in a recent issue of The Post. In his piece, the letter writer desperately tries to paint a delusional picture of the political landscape of the American population. The point of the letter writer’s tirade that I would like to address is his desperate plea to the reader to accept that President Donald Trump won an overwhelming victory, citing Trump’s victories in more counties as evidence of the president’s mandate. Though it is true that Trump won 85 percent of the counties in the country, the letter writer fails to point out that the vast majority of the counties Trump won are rural, with small populations. One county with a major city and equate to the populations of six, seven or even sometimes 20 of the rural counties combined. The letter writer unintentionally has demonstrated one of the greatest flaws in American politics; that all votes are not created equal.
Ever since the United States’ conception, its election process has been fundamentally flawed, favoring some people over others. To entice southern slave states to ratify the Constitution during the constitutional convention in 1787, the three-fifths compromise was created. It allowed for slaves to be counted as three-fifths of a person for both representation and taxation purposes. This compromise gave the rural southern states 33 percent more representation than it would have had before. Each state is given equal representation in the senate, two, regardless of population, further skewing the power structure in favor of the more rural southern states. Though this three-fifths compromise no longer exists, our representative democracy is still skewed in favor of rural states.
In California, one electoral college vote equals about 411,000 voters, while in Wyoming, one electoral college vote is awarded for every 135,000 voters. States get electoral college members based upon the number of congressional members. On principle alone, why should one person’s vote in Wyoming be more important than one person’s vote in California?
This outdated system doesn’t just disenfranchise Democrats, it also disenfranchises Republicans as well. Are there not differences between Ohio Republicans and Californian Republicans? In the 2016 election, almost 4.5 million Californians voted Republican which is nearly 16 times the amount of people who even cast ballots in Wyoming. Do their opinions matter less?
This issue isn’t about Republicans or Democrats, it’s about personal political power. I’m sure people in Wyoming are wonderful people, but should their vote count more than yours or mine? Just because Trump may have won Ohio with 2,841,000 votes, does that mean the other 2,400,000 people who didn’t vote for him should be silent? I highly doubt the letter writer believed Mr. Obama (who won more electoral votes in both elections than Mr. Trump in one election) was voicing the same opinion eight years ago.
Come on, let’s work together instead of being divisive.
Matthew Balsinger
Akron
This is a response to a letter writer’s opinion piece published in a recent issue of The Post. In his piece, the letter writer desperately tries to paint a delusional picture of the political landscape of the American population. The point of the letter writer’s tirade that I would like to address is his desperate plea to the reader to accept that President Donald Trump won an overwhelming victory, citing Trump’s victories in more counties as evidence of the president’s mandate. Though it is true that Trump won 85 percent of the counties in the country, the letter writer fails to point out that the vast majority of the counties Trump won are rural, with small populations. One county with a major city and equate to the populations of six, seven or even sometimes 20 of the rural counties combined. The letter writer unintentionally has demonstrated one of the greatest flaws in American politics; that all votes are not created equal.
Ever since the United States’ conception, its election process has been fundamentally flawed, favoring some people over others. To entice southern slave states to ratify the Constitution during the constitutional convention in 1787, the three-fifths compromise was created. It allowed for slaves to be counted as three-fifths of a person for both representation and taxation purposes. This compromise gave the rural southern states 33 percent more representation than it would have had before. Each state is given equal representation in the senate, two, regardless of population, further skewing the power structure in favor of the more rural southern states. Though this three-fifths compromise no longer exists, our representative democracy is still skewed in favor of rural states.
In California, one electoral college vote equals about 411,000 voters, while in Wyoming, one electoral college vote is awarded for every 135,000 voters. States get electoral college members based upon the number of congressional members. On principle alone, why should one person’s vote in Wyoming be more important than one person’s vote in California?
This outdated system doesn’t just disenfranchise Democrats, it also disenfranchises Republicans as well. Are there not differences between Ohio Republicans and Californian Republicans? In the 2016 election, almost 4.5 million Californians voted Republican which is nearly 16 times the amount of people who even cast ballots in Wyoming. Do their opinions matter less?
This issue isn’t about Republicans or Democrats, it’s about personal political power. I’m sure people in Wyoming are wonderful people, but should their vote count more than yours or mine? Just because Trump may have won Ohio with 2,841,000 votes, does that mean the other 2,400,000 people who didn’t vote for him should be silent? I highly doubt the letter writer believed Mr. Obama (who won more electoral votes in both elections than Mr. Trump in one election) was voicing the same opinion eight years ago.
Come on, let’s work together instead of being divisive.
Matthew Balsinger
Akron
