David Pepper highlights a troubling proposal in Missouri that undermines majority rule through gerrymandering-influenced thresholds for a Constitutional Amendment. Protecting democracy requires united efforts.
Share
*You can read more of David Pepper's outstanding work in his Pepperspectives newsletter.
By David Pepper
Last week, I talked to activists in Missouri about their effort to protect reproductive freedom there—and about the cynical and anti-democratic backlash from their gerrymandered legislature.
Sadly, it’s exactly what I’ve come to expect from these broken statehouses: 1) they are always seeking ways to subvert democracy because they know their policies (like abortion bans) and viewpoints are largely unpopular, and 2) they are always learning lessons from anti-democracy efforts around the country—be they successes or failures.
And in this case, Missouri legislators are proposing to subvert majority rule in a way that adapts to the lesson from Ohio last year — that voters value the principle of “one person, one vote” and will reject efforts to undermine it. (For my Voting Rights Academy on how the Warren Court enshrined the principle of “One Person, One Vote,” go HERE).
So the Missouri politicians are trying to sneak this through by modifying what the GOP tried in Ohio (a straight-up 60% threshold for anything to pass): requiring instead that a Constitutional Amendment earn not just a majority vote of the people across Missouri, but that it alsoearn a majority vote of the the state’s Congressional districts.
On the surface, it’s sounds like majority rule, right?
Wrong.
As I explain above, in a state with gerrymandered districts—whether it’s a Congressional district requirement or statehouse district requirement—this additional threshold becomes a poison pill to majority rule. A popular measure could still lose because the extreme gerrymander of those districts defeats it, as opposed to the vote of the people themselves.
And directly counter to the principle of “one person, one vote,” the voters who are overrepresented in those gerrymandered red districts would be given significantly more weight than the voters in underrepresented, packed districts. A viewpoint shared by a minority of the voters could easily overcome that shared by the majority.
Folks from across the nation helped Ohio topple an attack like this last August.
If they try this in Missouri, let’s commit to fight back in the same way there. Both to protect democracy in Missouri, AND so they don’t try this sneak attack anywhere else (because you know they will if it succeeds!).
On July 24, 2024, President Biden ended his candidacy for reelection, acknowledging it was best for America that he “pass the torch to a new generation” as “the best way to unite our nation.” But, writes Steven Beschloss, "It was much more: This was his profound articulation of what’s at stake that supersedes his personal ambition."
David Pepper writes: “For the first time in modern memory, Ohio Republicans attached conditions to legislation that extended the deadline for a presidential nominee to be placed on the Ohio ballot. In the past, including in 2020, this has always been done as a matter of course, and for nominees of either party. "
The front lines in the fight for our democracy is taking place at the state level with a battle for the integrity of a system on the brink. In this episode Rick welcomes Jena Griswold, the Secretary of State of Colorado, for an in-depth discussion about the current state of democracy in the United States. They explore the challenges and successes of election security, the rise of election denialism, and the impact of disinformation and deep fakes on the electoral process. Jena shares insights from her experience in overseeing Colorado's elections, highlighting the importance of maintaining a secure and accessible voting system. She also discusses the ongoing efforts to hold bad actors accountable and the resilience of the American people in defending democratic values.
We must not forget the dramatic implications of a second Trump presidency. In this episode Rick interviews Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI. They discuss the potential consequences of a second Trump presidency, focusing on the threats to democracy and the justice system. McCabe provides insights into the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and reflects on Trump's use of power and influence. The conversation highlights the importance of protecting democratic institutions and maintaining accountability in government.
