# Voting Constitutional Amendment **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 12, 2011, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413 "2011-03-12T15:28:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2011, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/41 "2011-03-18T19:53:46Z")
> [@appleciders](#): > > I can think of two possible ways: A poor or otherwise undesirable territory applies for statehood, and it is offered statehood on the condition that it receives only one Senator; a rich or powerful territory applies for statehood on the condition that it should receive three Senators. Both pretty unlikely as things stand today, but I can envision it happening in the early U.S. more easily. Wouldn’t the other states have to agree unanimously, though, since they wouldn’t have equal suffrage in the Senate? I could see how perhaps a state getting fewer Senators wouldn’t deprive the other states of the equal representation (since they’re winning out), but a state getting more would definitely require every other state to agree. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2011, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/42 "2011-03-18T21:50:21Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > This isn’t right, because voter turnout is expressed as voters divided by voting-eligible adults. The relevant ratio for assessing the impact of the OP is voters divided by population. > > The largest group of non-voting-eligible population is children. It seems perverse to take away their representation in Congress. Children can’t vote, of course, but they’ve always been recognized (as were women in earlier generations) as part of the _polity_ in whose interest Congress is acting. I see no reason to change this. I accept that point as a reinforcement of my opposition to the whole idea. Overall the \<18 year olds in the U.S. are [about 24.1 percent.](http://www.census.gov/population/www/projections/projectionsagesex.html) In Maine, it’s less than 20%, while in Utah, more than 30% of the people are under 18. So there’s a much higher percentage of available voters in Maine than Utah. Does that mean that we should give a proportionately higher weight to Utah’s voters, that we should give the right to vote to children, or ignore children entirely? Let’s throw the question back to **Paul.** ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2011, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/43 "2011-03-18T22:55:07Z")
Quoth **kunilou** : > [@](#): > > …New Hampshire, arguably the most conservative state in the nation; A quick check at Wikipedia shows that they have a Democratic governor and one Democratic senator, and voted for the Democrat in four of the past five presidential elections, including the most recent one. Both houses of the New Hampshire legislature are currently controlled by Republicans, but before the most recent election, both were held by Democrats. I can’t see how you can call that more conservative than pretty much anywhere in the South: Alabama, for instance, has a Republican governor, two Republican senators, six out of seven representatives Republican, both houses of the legislature Republican-controlled, and hasn’t voted for a Democrat for President since 1976. And it’s not even remotely close to Utah. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2011, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/44 "2011-03-18T23:07:57Z")
It might also encourage fraud. We have enough problems with votes not getting counted, and extra ones that are. We would be better off solving that problem first. I don’t think it’s that hard. I get the impression the average dry cleaner does better at keeping track of clothes than some districts do at keeping track of votes. In general, I don’t think democracy works better by restricting representation, and if we want to encourage voting, penalize the individuals who don’t vote. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2011, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/45 "2011-03-19T00:24:35Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Quoth **kunilou** :A quick check at Wikipedia shows that they have a Democratic governor and one Democratic senator, and voted for the Democrat in four of the past five presidential elections, including the most recent one. Both houses of the New Hampshire legislature are currently controlled by Republicans, but before the most recent election, both were held by Democrats. I can’t see how you can call that more conservative than pretty much anywhere in the South: Alabama, for instance, has a Republican governor, two Republican senators, six out of seven representatives Republican, both houses of the legislature Republican-controlled, and hasn’t voted for a Democrat for President since 1976. And it’s not even remotely close to Utah. Okay, let’s agree to amend my statement to this: _In the winner’s column you have Iowa, Minnesota, North and South Dakota and Wisconsin – all solid, rural heartland states; New Hampshire, which has voted Democratic in four of the last five presidential elections; urban Rhode Island; and Wyoming, which is both conservative and rural._ Now, I ask again, based on the actual voting patterns, what problem does changing Congressional apportionment solve? ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2011, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/46 "2011-03-19T01:09:44Z")
It encourages government to encourage voting. It discourages suppression of voting. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2011, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/47 "2011-03-19T01:27:54Z")
In 2010 Maine had a 53.5% [voter age participation](http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2010G.html). The District of Columbia had 26.7%. Please provide evidence that supports the idea that the District of Columbia suppresses voting more than Maine. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2011, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/48 "2011-03-19T03:00:27Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > In 2010 Maine had a 53.5% [voter age participation](http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2010G.html). The District of Columbia had 26.7%. > > Please provide evidence that supports the idea that the District of Columbia suppresses voting more than Maine. That’s kind of like saying “Djibouti had a 0% voter age participation in the last US congressional elections.” Off-year elections don’t really have any allure for DC…they aren’t allowed to have Congressmen or Senators, so why vote at all in the off-year elections? ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2011, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/49 "2011-03-19T03:23:33Z")
Sigh. Okay, New Hampshire. Right next door to Maine. Similar adult population. Maine allows convicted felons to vote. New Hampshire forbids current prisoners (a total of 2,371) from voting, but restores the franchise after release. Both have only a small percentage of adults who aren’t citizens. Both had roughly the same number of adults overseas who were still elegible to vote. New Hampshire’s turnout was 43.7% – almost 10 percentage points lower than Maine. Other than the 2,371 adults currently incarcerated, please provide evidence that New Hampshire suppresses voting more than Maine. Let me cut to the chase. \*\*Paul’s \*\*argument is that changing the apportionment laws to “be based on the number of lawful ballots cast in the preceding election for representatives to that house” will encourage voter participation and discourage suppression. I believe the current, population-based method, is more fair, and I challenge anyone who agrees with **Paul** to back up their position. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2011, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/50 "2011-03-19T03:31:08Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > Sigh. Okay, New Hampshire. Right next door to Maine. Similar adult population. Maine allows convicted felons to vote. New Hampshire forbids current prisoners (a total of 2,371) from voting, but restores the franchise after release. Both have only a small percentage of adults who aren’t citizens. Both had roughly the same number of adults overseas who were still elegible to vote. New Hampshire’s turnout was 43.7% – almost 10 percentage points lower than Maine. Other than the 2,371 adults currently incarcerated, please provide evidence that New Hampshire suppresses voting more than Maine. > > Let me cut to the chase. \*\*Paul’s \*\*argument is that changing the apportionment laws to “be based on the number of lawful ballots cast in the preceding election for representatives to that house” will encourage voter participation and discourage suppression. I believe the current, population-based method, is more fair, and I challenge anyone who agrees with **Paul** to back up their position. I agree with you on the larger question. I just thought DC was a really poor example to illustrate lack of voter enthusiasm in an off-year when there are really NO national positions they can vote for. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2011, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413/51 "2011-03-20T19:23:12Z")
Out of curiosity, I just checked, and Montana had 38% of the total population (I’m not sure what the voting-age population is) show up to the polls in 2010, despite not having any interesting major races on the ballot. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voting-constitutional-amendment/574413.md?page=2)