:thumb:

Special treatment for minorities is not fairness, no one should get special treatment.

So how is puting 1 or 2 minorities on a council of 6, 9, or a dozen going to change that?

I'll give you a couple of examples.

A city/town council has decided to undertake a major capital improvement project to fix up the city parks...but over a 3 year period. There is one "central" park that should be first on the list, but there is no compelling citywide reason to prioritize the other neighborhood parks. The six council members, all White and all living in the predominantly White neighborhoods of the city. There is no one on the council who lives in the predominantly Hispanic neighborhood. Which neighborhood park is most likely to be last on the list?

A city has an opportunity to receive a community development grant from the state. There is no one project that the council can come up that will benefit the entire city, but each of the council members has a project in his/her neighborhood that they think should be funded. Who is there to promote the project for the Hispanic neighborhood.

It is not special treatment...it is having an equal voice on the council and the opportunity to be represented by someone from within the community.

The change? Having someone from within the Hispanic community on the council who might better understand the issues of the community and, at the very least, providing a voice on the council.

Sure, because every majority candidate feels those minorities must be oppressed, we'll fix up their park with broken glass and infected needles. :rolleyes:

If the voting is for several candidates at large, and the minority community wants one of there own, (whether it's a vote for one, or vote for say, 3 of 6), all they have to do is get off their ass and vote for him. 20, 30 or 40% turnout shows they really don't want to make an effort, they want it handed to them by do-gooders making fucked up laws.

Broken glass and infected needles...come on, dude.

My point was that on issues like this, which are common at the local level and have no real citywide impact, a White council member (or any council member) is more likely to serve his closest constituents first.. the ones they know voted for him.

As to at-large voting, that is not how it works.

I dont know the specifics of the town in question, but if there is a six member council, probably elected in overlapping terms...say three at a time for two years...each citizens votes once, but votes for three people.

Increasing the percentage turn-out of the minority voters does not change the odds against their ever achieving representation if all (or most) of the majority voters continue to vote on color (or neighborhood) lines.

added afterthought:
cumulative voting does increase the chances for a minority to get elected....just not as much as changing to a sytem of voting by district.

God Dammed Right.

What a load of bull shit. Statistics consistently show that minority voters are overwhelmingly Demoncratic. Pedal your propaganda elsewhere.

Most local elections are non-partisan...and putting that aside, it still doesnt address the issue of having representation on the governing board from within one's own community.

Most people don't turn out for local election cycles. On a national level is where Obama and the Demoncrats will gain votes by giving illegals citizenship status and they know it.

In the imortal words of Rham It Through Emanuel, never let a good crisis go to waste.

I'll be happy to discuss it further with Bruce if he would like.

That's true, Philly is Democrat and elections are settled in the primary. My burb is Republican and the same is true, in fact you'll find the same people running for things like the school board, on both tickets.

To bring the discussion full circle, a Hispanic was elected to the council in Port Chester last week, using the court-sanctioned cumulative voting system.

It did not provide additional rights to Hispanics, it was not undemocratic. It corrected a deficiency in the voting system that previously benefited the majority at the expense of the minority.

OK, I misunderstood how this works. They give everybody 6 votes, not just some people. So they went from one man, one vote, to one man, six votes.

I still don't like it, but I'm less incensed.
The hispanics make up nearly half the 30,000 population, and the top 6 of 13 candidates get elected. Sounds to me like they never elected one before because they weren't trying very fucking hard. I also suspect they elected one of the two running, because of...

link