327
submitted 3 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] azimir@lemmy.ml 83 points 3 months ago

Ah, so they signed onto the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact!

There's a CGP Grey video on how it generally works for those with short attention space and/or a need for dry government humor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUX-frlNBJY

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 32 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Waaaiit, Puerto Ricans don't get a vote?

I'm a dirty foreigner and I'm not too clear on the status of Puerto Rico, but somehow I'd assumed that they'd get to vote in federal elections since they're a part of the country

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 60 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

They're a part of the country, in that they are citizens and pay taxes. They don't have representation in Congress (they send delegates, but those people can't vote on anything) and they aren't represented in the electoral college.

Fun fact, citizens of Washington DC are similarly unrepresented in Congress, but they do get to vote for President.

[-] Lmaydev@programming.dev 49 points 3 months ago

Sounds like taxation without representation to me

[-] yeather@lemmy.ca 26 points 3 months ago

The DC liscense plate says just that.

[-] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 9 points 3 months ago

Quick, throw that one a license plate.

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 11 points 3 months ago

I've never really understood why DC folks don't get a vote, but at least I knew about that one (it gets mentioned in movies and series from time to time)

[-] yeather@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 months ago

DC is a small area entirelt under the ruling of the federal government, and because the government is made up of representatives from states they do not get a vote. The original idea was congress and the federal government shouldn’t be housed under any state laws.

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

But I'd assume there's other folks in DC besides just congresscritters? It just feels weird that you disenfranchise (whew what a word to spell) people when they are state representatives or they happen to live in the place where the congresscritters do their thing.

I think in general disenfranchising people feels weird to me; I'm Finnish and I'm so used to the idea that literally everybody has a vote no matter what – here all citizens who are over 18 get a vote, whether in parliamentary, presidental, or municipal elections, and the only way to lose your right to vote is to renounce your citizenship. Doesn't matter whether you're an ax murderer or a member of parliament (hopefully not both at the same time though.)

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

They're not willing enough to riot.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

Nope. They get a non-voting representative in congress who can speak on issues but has no ability to directly impact legislation.

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 14 points 3 months ago

That honestly seems a bit fucked up. What on earth do they get out of the arrangement if they're not even able to have the slightest bit of influence in the system?

[-] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

They have access to US markets and are defended by the US military, without some of the requirements of being a full state.

It seems to be that it'd be better for PR to join as a full state, but thus far they've not gotten the votes together to do it.

[-] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 months ago

from what I understand about it, which I am in no way a scholar on the area I am just going off what I remember from my grandfather who was a history teacher. In order for them to get statehood they essentially have to vote on it twice in favor in a row, because they need to vote on it to elect faux representatives to act on their behalf in washington, then on top of that they need to vote yes on it again a few years later during the actual status of the statehood. Currently they have done the first two steps, and are (unless it's blocked) currently set up to vote on the status of their state this August.

[-] Drusas@kbin.social 11 points 3 months ago

It's not as though they're not given the opportunity to become a state. They have voted in the past for things to stay as-is. If I recall, it was a pretty close vote, however.

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 months ago

Ohhh ok, I see. Interesting that they voted against it; are there downsides to statehood vs. their current status?

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 9 points 3 months ago

Big Money is involved - here is an interesting description, enjoy!:-)

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 months ago

Big Money is involved

Fuckin' figures. Thanks for the link! My friend's been telling me to watch John Oliver anyhow so now I have a great excuse

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 8 points 3 months ago

A lot of economic benefits. Easy trade with the US, for example.

[-] smort@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

Just a note on the tax part:

Consequently, while all Puerto Rico residents pay federal taxes, many residents are not required to pay federal income taxes. Aside from income tax, U.S. federal taxes include customs taxes,[1] federal commodity taxes, and federal payroll taxes (Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment taxes).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Puerto_Rico

[-] ilickfrogs@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

Basically they are what the 13 colonies were. Taxed to shit without support and rep lmao

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Hah that's true. What would be their equivalent of the Boston Tea Party today? Dump all the Viagra they've manufactured in the sea? "Puerto Rico Viagra Party" sounds like a porn title

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

Puerto Rico is not a state. Neither is DC, nor Guam, etc

[-] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 months ago

I always forget about Guam.

I didn't realize that statehood is a requirement for actual representation in Congress / the House and being able to participate in federal elections. I've just blithely assumed that they'd get some sort of representation regardless, and that everybody would have voting rights.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Pretty sure they can vote, technically. However only states have senators and congress critters, and the president is elected by the electoral college, which is based on house and senate representatives

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] nezbyte@lemmy.world 71 points 3 months ago

On Wednesday, Maine’s legislature passed a bill joining a compact to commit all of their electoral votes, regardless of who won in their individual state, to whichever candidate won the national popular vote.

[-] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 41 points 3 months ago

This brings the total electoral votes joining the compact to 209. Michigan will join soon, bringing it to 225.

270 electoral votes needed for the change to take effect. We're getting there.

[-] CraigeryTheKid@lemm.ee 20 points 3 months ago

I didn't think "getting there" is going to happen in our lifetime. We're just going to hit a ceiling where "obviously blue" states join, and the rest don't, which will hit before 270.

[-] smort@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

There could be some purple states where the stars align and this passes, but yeah, at least a generation, probably more

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] radiohead37@lemmy.world 38 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I don’t live in a swing state and I feel disenfranchised. My vote for president, for all intents and purposes, does not count in the current electoral college system.

I can’t wait for the compact to go into effect. Turnout in so many states would increase a lot.

However, my optimism is tampered by this supreme court.

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

If anything, living in a swing state makes it count more

[-] jeffw@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

I swear the word “don’t” was added in later

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] cAUzapNEAGLb@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago

Fantastic, the electoral college is closer to retirement!

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 3 months ago

Good job Maine. Abolish the electoral college.

[-] Etterra@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

Not a great solution. We need ranked voting. Not perfect, but significantly better than the 2 party shitshow we're currently saddled with.

[-] iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com 20 points 2 months ago

Maine already has ranked choice voting for statewide elections. They can't fix the national system.

If the hack to at least give the person with the most votes the Presidency wins, then maybe we can work for ranked choice for Presidential elections.

[-] monsterpiece42@reddthat.com 7 points 2 months ago

Weirdly Maine is/maybe was the only state that did ranked choice voting. But it also kinda sounds like this new system supercedes it.

https://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming/rankedchoicefaq.html

[-] quindraco@lemm.ee 13 points 3 months ago
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

So, how is this more democratic AND Nebraska doing away with EVs by congressional district less democratic? Is making the winner based on less granular vote or more what we want?

[-] pat_otter@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

The goal should be making the national popular election the deciding factor in a presidential race, Maine is moving us closer to that goal, Nebraska is not.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
327 points (98.5% liked)

News

21718 readers
3545 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS