Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which of these areas has its voice most suppressed either at the state or the national level?
I have to mention that here in Maryland they are gerrymandering Western Maryland by combining it with many liberal Democrat DC area suburbs that they have nothing in common with. Meanwhile, on Maryland' Eastern Shore, lawmakers are legitimately talkign about a "war on rural Maryland" waged by liberal Democrats in Annapolis. Part of it involves banning economic development in Maryland's rural counties, having rural taxpayers subsidize urban transit project in Baltimore and the Washington DC area, and forcing gay marriage and illegal immigration into the state's conservative small towns.
I also wanted to vote southern Illinois but at least the Chicago area pays local taxes toward some of its transit and highway needs. However, Chicago does force down a lot of laws that are contray to the conservative voters of downstate Illinois. For example Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation....it not enough for Chicago to have strict laws they are forcing strict gun laws and strict smoking laws on the state's rural areas which has caused resentment. I've hard that the residents of rural Georgia also resent having their tax money siphoned off to Atlanta, and having to pay high taxes just to fund Atlanta's public transportation and highways. However I don't think rural Georgia subsidizes Atlanta the way rural Maryland subsidizes the DC suburbs through taxes and tolls. And Atlanta itself is not radically liberal so politically it is not as different from rural Georgia as NYC is from upstate New YOrk or inland California is from Los Angeles and San Francisco.
In national elections, the voters in most of the regions in this poll really feel they don't have a voice because the cities dominate these states so heavily. States like Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Tennesssee are more balanced between urban and rural areas and between regions within the state. For example, South Florida does not completely dominate Florida, and the Tampa Bay area and Orlando are also very powerful, plus Jacksonville.
Last edited by Tom Lennox 70; 08-22-2012 at 09:14 PM..
I also wanted to vote southern Illinois but at least the Chicago area pays local taxes toward some of its transit and highway needs. However, Chicago does force down a lot of laws that are contray to the conservative voters of downstate Illinois. For example Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation....it not enough for Chicago to have strict laws they are forcing strict gun laws and strict smoking laws on the state's rural areas which has caused resentment.
This is a poor argument that is heard all too often. Where does the majority of Illinois live? In Chicagoland. Why does the most money get spent in Chicagoland? Because most of the population lives there. In fact, Southern Illinois gets more for each tax dollar than Chicagoland does. Why are most of the laws in Illinois reflective of Chicagoland? Because most of Illinois' population lives there.
It's not like Chicago has a small portion of Illinois' population and gets all of the money and all of the voting power. So, no, Chicagoland does not force laws on people. They are voted on and passed because Chicagoland has the majority of Illinois' population.
I bet urban areas subsidize rural areas in most states. I know that Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are 59% of Pennsylvania's population and 72% of Pennsylvania's GDP, but have less than a dollar spent on them for every dollar they pay in state taxes. At least PennDOT's secretary put the smack down on all the hicks in the sticks who complain about public transit subsidies in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, and pointed out that more money is spent subsidizing rural roads than urban transit. If it carries fewer than 10,000 vehicles per day and the state paves it, then it's subsidized. It's a gross misallocation of resources, if you ask me. They can drive on tar and chips until after the two busiest segments of Interstate in Pennsylvania (I-76 in Philadelphia, I-376 in Pittsburgh) are widened and upgraded to modern Interstate standards. More people use them, so it makes more sense -- too much sense for all the Rick Santorum voters in the rural parts of the state, apparently.
Which of these areas has its voice most suppressed either at the state or the national level?
I have to mention that here in Maryland they are gerrymandering Western Maryland by combining it with many liberal Democrat DC area suburbs that they have nothing in common with. Meanwhile, on Maryland' Eastern Shore, lawmakers are legitimately talkign about a "war on rural Maryland" waged by liberal Democrats in Annapolis. Part of it involves banning economic development in Maryland's rural counties, having rural taxpayers subsidize urban transit project in Baltimore and the Washington DC area, and forcing gay marriage and illegal immigration into the state's conservative small towns.
I also wanted to vote southern Illinois but at least the Chicago area pays local taxes toward some of its transit and highway needs. However, Chicago does force down a lot of laws that are contray to the conservative voters of downstate Illinois. For example Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation....it not enough for Chicago to have strict laws they are forcing strict gun laws and strict smoking laws on the state's rural areas which has caused resentment. I've hard that the residents of rural Georgia also resent having their tax money siphoned off to Atlanta, and having to pay high taxes just to fund Atlanta's public transportation and highways. However I don't think rural Georgia subsidizes Atlanta the way rural Maryland subsidizes the DC suburbs through taxes and tolls. And Atlanta itself is not radically liberal so politically it is not as different from rural Georgia as NYC is from upstate New YOrk or inland California is from Los Angeles and San Francisco.
In national elections, the voters in most of the regions in this poll really feel they don't have a voice because the cities dominate these states so heavily. States like Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Tennesssee are more balanced between urban and rural areas and between regions within the state. For example, South Florida does not completely dominate Florida, and the Tampa Bay area and Orlando are also very powerful, plus Jacksonville.
Why is it only the democratic states that you list here?? What about states like Texas, where they muzzle all of the more liberal areas?! There are two sides to this!
This is a poor argument that is heard all too often. Where does the majority of Illinois live? In Chicagoland. Why does the most money get spent in Chicagoland? Because most of the population lives there. In fact, Southern Illinois gets more for each tax dollar than Chicagoland does. Why are most of the laws in Illinois reflective of Chicagoland? Because most of Illinois' population lives there.
It's not like Chicago has a small portion of Illinois' population and gets all of the money and all of the voting power. So, no, Chicagoland does not force laws on people. They are voted on and passed because Chicagoland has the majority of Illinois' population.
That' the point though. Since southern Illinois has a smaller portion of the population, basically their voice is never heard at all and is completely drowned out by Chicago area voters and politicians. The thing is, I can understand why Chicago might need stricter gun laws because it is a large city, but these laws are simply unnecessary in rural areas and hurts rural residents. Same with all the other nanny state things like a statewide ban on smoking and cell phone driving when these only reflect urban liberal values. Not that smoking is good but it should be up to business owners to allow or not allow smoking in their esstablishments and people can choose to go or not spend money there accordingly.
Since the Republican and Democratic parties monopolize the redistricting process over virtually the entire country, those who do not belong to these parties nor have any sympathetic leanings toward the two parties could be seen as suppressed. In this case, "Other" = "Everywhere."
As for California, its asinine supermajority requirement for tax hikes (and, until recently, even to pass a state budget) means that Republicans from sparsely populated rural areas have had hugely disproportionate influence statewide.
As for California, its asinine supermajority requirement for tax hikes (and, until recently, even to pass a state budget) means that Republicans from sparsely populated rural areas have had hugely disproportionate influence statewide.
You are saying that Californians in LA County don't think California state taxes are high enough and want them even higher? Also at least California has local sales taxes. Again, why should someone in Barstow or Bakersfield pay high statewide taxes just to upgrade the LA freeway system?
Which of these areas has its voice most suppressed either at the state or the national level?
I have to mention that here in Maryland they are gerrymandering Western Maryland by combining it with many liberal Democrat DC area suburbs that they have nothing in common with. Meanwhile, on Maryland' Eastern Shore, lawmakers are legitimately talkign about a "war on rural Maryland" waged by liberal Democrats in Annapolis. Part of it involves banning economic development in Maryland's rural counties, having rural taxpayers subsidize urban transit project in Baltimore and the Washington DC area, and forcing gay marriage and illegal immigration into the state's conservative small towns.
I also wanted to vote southern Illinois but at least the Chicago area pays local taxes toward some of its transit and highway needs. However, Chicago does force down a lot of laws that are contray to the conservative voters of downstate Illinois. For example Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation....it not enough for Chicago to have strict laws they are forcing strict gun laws and strict smoking laws on the state's rural areas which has caused resentment. I've hard that the residents of rural Georgia also resent having their tax money siphoned off to Atlanta, and having to pay high taxes just to fund Atlanta's public transportation and highways. However I don't think rural Georgia subsidizes Atlanta the way rural Maryland subsidizes the DC suburbs through taxes and tolls. And Atlanta itself is not radically liberal so politically it is not as different from rural Georgia as NYC is from upstate New YOrk or inland California is from Los Angeles and San Francisco.
In national elections, the voters in most of the regions in this poll really feel they don't have a voice because the cities dominate these states so heavily. States like Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Tennesssee are more balanced between urban and rural areas and between regions within the state. For example, South Florida does not completely dominate Florida, and the Tampa Bay area and Orlando are also very powerful, plus Jacksonville.
Here in Texas it is the Democrats that have had their voice deminished, the GOP has redrawn district lines which gives the Repubs a major advantage in particular areas, the district lines look like they were drawn by a drunken sailor.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
