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.
It is unfair that California has 55 electoral votes. In my opinion, the state should be forced to give a percentage of its electoral votes to other states that are less fortunate. States like North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Alaska, Delaware and Vermont only have 3 electors. Shouldn't California pay its fair share? What would be an appropriate electoral redistribution tax? Maybe 30% to 40%, or perhaps higher? As is stands California has 17 more electors than Texas, which is the 2nd highest. Ideally, we could take that 17 from California and redistribute it to the states listed above. Would this help level the playing field?
California already gives much more money to be distributed among the states than any other state. You take all their money and now you want to take their vote?
California already gives much more money to be distributed among the states than any other state. You take all their money and now you want to take their vote?
lol, the OP's comparison to welfare falls flat on its face. Guess he forgot that CA sends more money to the Fedgov than it takes in, unlike every single red state bar Texas
California already gives much more money to be distributed among the states than any other state. You take all their money and now you want to take their vote?
California has far too much representation. That is why I proposed an electoral college redistribution tax. The money is a different issue.
Too much representation, really? Is that why my vote counts for almost nothing when compared to a vote in Wyoming? California has 12% of the US population and only 10% of the electoral votes. If anything, we should get more, not less.
11-16-2016, 09:58 PM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SandyCo
Too much representation, really? Is that why my vote counts for almost nothing when compared to a vote in Wyoming? California has 12% of the US population and only 10% of the electoral votes. If anything, we should get more, not less.
Exactly.
Votes should be given to people, not land or arbitrary state borders drawn on a map.
There are about a zillion threads on here about the EC. I would find another one if you want a serious discussion, and not take the tasty bait offered here.
It is unfair that California has 55 electoral votes. In my opinion, the state should be forced to give a percentage of its electoral votes to other states that are less fortunate. States like North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, Alaska, Delaware and Vermont only have 3 electors. Shouldn't California pay its fair share? What would be an appropriate electoral redistribution tax? Maybe 30% to 40%, or perhaps higher? As is stands California has 17 more electors than Texas, which is the 2nd highest. Ideally, we could take that 17 from California and redistribute it to the states listed above. Would this help level the playing field?
Good point. How friggin racist is it that they have that many votes?
You're right, Catgirl64. Thank you. I don't know what I was thinking.
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.
I don't know what I was thinking.