(Written
22 January 2003)
The
big issue here in Oklahoma is cockfighting.
Back in November, a statewide vote banned it. Since then, cockfighters have obtained numerous court injunctions
to prevent the enforcement of the ban.
Majority rules, right? Well,
perhaps. Oklahoma’s vote to ban
cockfighting shows some of the flaws of the simple majority system, and why the
Electoral College should never be chunked.
You
see, the majority in this issue consists of Tulsa and Oklahoma City. Just about every rural county voted to keep
cockfighting. The urban counties voted
against it. Oklahoma is interesting
because its population is split just about evenly between the two urban areas,
Tulsa and OKC, and the rural areas.
This creates a very interesting dynamic in which the two cities can
control what happens throughout the entire state. In the cockfighting issue, for example, the rural counties voted
to defeat the ban, while the urban counties voted for the ban. The problem is the majorities for the ban in
the two urban counties were much greater than the majorities against the ban in
the rural counties, and the ban passed.
The result, then, is city dwellers deciding an issue that doesn’t really
affect them. This is the tyranny of the
majority that the founding fathers were so concerned about when they were
hammering out the Constitution.
The
2000 election showed that without the safeguards of the electoral system, the
same thing could happen at the national level.
Think about it—Al Gore won the popular votes, despite the fact that Bush
carried more states. If the electoral
system had been abolished, then Gore would be President right now, even though
people in the majority of the sates did not want him. The rural vote across the nation would, in effect, be cancelled
out by the vote of a few major urban centers.
I
must admit, that I am not a Shrub fan.
I was not pleased with the way he manipulated the system, I still think
he is a fraud and an idiot and is going to drive this country to destruction
unless he is stopped, but I digress.
However, even though Gore would have won if it weren’t for the Electoral
College, I do not favor the abolishing of the Electoral College; I do not want
to see a tyranny of the majority.
It
is a shame that the state governments are no longer allowed to mimic the
federal government. Many states used to
apportion State Senate Districts by county just as the Federal Senate is
apportioned by state, but some city dwellers in Tennessee sued to have the
system disbanded on the grounds that it violated “equal protection”, and now
state legislative houses must be proportional.
(Do as I say, don’t do as I do.)
Is it really right that people in Tulsa, whose contact with chickens is
limited to KFC, should be able to tell people in Ardmore what they can and
cannot do with their poultry?
Imagine,
if you will, if the each state had its own version of the Electoral College. Candidates for statewide office would be
forced to visit each and every county.
For example, in Texas, a candidate would not only need to visit Harris
County but also Loving County, population less than 1000, as it would be
necessary to win a majority of counties to win the governorship. Some may holler that it is unfair to have a
county of two million equal to one of one thousand. However, it is fair to the 1000 residents of Loving County to
have their lifestyles dictated to them by some city slickers hundreds of miles
away, most of whom have never even heard of Loving County?
It
is time that we look long and hard about the concept of majority rule. The majority has a duty to respect the right
and wishes of the minority, not to treat them as the surfs of the manor. The problem we have today is that the
majority has become mean and selfish, and tramples on the rights of the
minority. We need to look no further
than to the antics of the Republican Party, who have taken their new majority
status as an invitation to humiliate the Democrats. “We know how the Dems feel about Pickering and Owen, so let’s
just shove it in their face that they are now powerless to stop us!! Nanny, nanny, boo, boo!!”
You
see this everywhere. The majority,
instead of being gracious in victory, instead showboats and does a victory
dance. Nothing like rubbing it in! POAs are a great example of this—those
property owners that bully their neighbors to get their way go on ridiculous
personal vendettas against other neighbors they do not like. (“Fred, your grass is 1/16 an inch too high;
either cut it or we foreclose!”)
This
“tyranny by the majority” is one of the reasons I have moved to a small town in
Oklahoma. In Texas, it seemed like
every group was trying to impose their views on everyone else. Want to get a drink? Too bad.
Drinking is evil, because we say it is, so you can’t do it, either. Want to a casino? Tough luck. We said you
can’t. You can’t do this, you can’t do
that. There is only enough repression
that a person can take before you get to the breaking point and rebel. (Remember the Civil War? One of the very legitimate justifications
given by the Rebels was fear that the Free States would impose their morality
on the South, as the free states were in the majority.) In a smaller town, in a poorer state, people
tend to have better things to do with their time (like survive) than worry
about what everyone else is doing.
Despite
what you may think, being a Christian-majority nation does not make us a
Christian nation, so don’t impose your Christianity on me, thank you very
much. (Besides, most so-called
Christians really aren’t). We are not a
white or brown or red or blue or green or purple nation, so let’s not try to
make force everyone into the same rigid orthodoxy just because most follow
it. It is our diversity that has made
our nation great. Sadly, we are quickly
losing our diversity because of “majority rule.” If you are not part of the majority, you are scum, you are irrelevant,
and you just don’t matter.
It
doesn’t have to be this way.