[EL] After impeachment and removal
D. A. Holtzman
d at LAvoteFIRE.org
Mon Oct 28 13:50:25 PDT 2019
If you want to assess the fairness of U.S. Senate actions vis-à-vis the
principle of majority rule, make yourself a spreadsheet with the
decennial U.S. Census counts for each state, and assign one-half of each
state’s population to each of its Senators.The Senate’s population base
is the population of the fifty states.With your spreadsheet, then, you
can calculate the percentage of the “Senate Population Base” (SPB) whose
Senators voted for or against a particular action.
I have an old version of such a spreadsheet, but I haven’t updated it
for the current roster of Senators.The 2010 Census data I used are still
valid, though.So, here are those numbers:
*STATE*
POPULATION
SENATOR'S POPULATION BASE
Portion of the SENATE POPULATION BASE
AL
Alabama
4,779,736
2,389,868.0
0.776%
AL
Alabama
4,779,736
2,389,868.0
0.776%
AK
Alaska
710,231
355,115.5
0.115%
AK
Alaska
710,231
355,115.5
0.115%
AZ
Arizona
6,392,017
3,196,008.5
1.037%
AZ
Arizona
6,392,017
3,196,008.5
1.037%
AR
Arkansas
2,915,918
1,457,959.0
0.473%
AR
Arkansas
2,915,918
1,457,959.0
0.473%
CA
California
37,253,956
18,626,978.0
6.045%
CA
California
37,253,956
18,626,978.0
6.045%
CO
*Colorado*
5,029,196
2,514,598.0
0.816%
CO
*Colorado*
5,029,196
2,514,598.0
0.816%
CT
Connecticut
3,574,097
1,787,048.5
0.580%
CT
Connecticut
3,574,097
1,787,048.5
0.580%
DE
Delaware
897,934
448,967.0
0.146%
DE
Delaware
897,934
448,967.0
0.146%
FL
*Florida*
18,801,310
9,400,655.0
3.051%
FL
*Florida*
18,801,310
9,400,655.0
3.051%
GA
Georgia
9,687,653
4,843,826.5
1.572%
GA
Georgia
9,687,653
4,843,826.5
1.572%
HI
Hawaii
1,360,301
680,150.5
0.221%
HI
Hawaii
1,360,301
680,150.5
0.221%
ID
Idaho
1,567,582
783,791.0
0.254%
ID
Idaho
1,567,582
783,791.0
0.254%
IL
Illinois
12,830,632
6,415,316.0
2.082%
IL
Illinois
12,830,632
6,415,316.0
2.082%
IN
*Indiana*
6,483,802
3,241,901.0
1.052%
IN
*Indiana*
6,483,802
3,241,901.0
1.052%
IA
Iowa
3,046,355
1,523,177.5
0.494%
IA
Iowa
3,046,355
1,523,177.5
0.494%
KS
Kansas
2,853,118
1,426,559.0
0.463%
KS
Kansas
2,853,118
1,426,559.0
0.463%
KY
Kentucky
4,339,367
2,169,683.5
0.704%
KY
Kentucky
4,339,367
2,169,683.5
0.704%
LA
Louisiana
4,533,372
2,266,686.0
0.736%
LA
Louisiana
4,533,372
2,266,686.0
0.736%
ME
*Maine*
1,328,361
664,180.5
0.216%
ME
*Maine*
1,328,361
664,180.5
0.216%
MD
Maryland
5,773,552
2,886,776.0
0.937%
MD
Maryland
5,773,552
2,886,776.0
0.937%
MA
Massachusetts
6,547,629
3,273,814.5
1.062%
MA
Massachusetts
6,547,629
3,273,814.5
1.062%
MI
Michigan
9,883,640
4,941,820.0
1.604%
MI
Michigan
9,883,640
4,941,820.0
1.604%
MN
Minnesota
5,303,925
2,651,962.5
0.861%
MN
Minnesota
5,303,925
2,651,962.5
0.861%
MS
Mississippi
2,967,297
1,483,648.5
0.481%
MS
Mississippi
2,967,297
1,483,648.5
0.481%
MO
*Missouri*
5,988,927
2,994,463.5
0.972%
MO
*Missouri*
5,988,927
2,994,463.5
0.972%
MT
*Montana*
989,415
494,707.5
0.161%
MT
*Montana*
989,415
494,707.5
0.161%
NE
Nebraska
1,826,341
913,170.5
0.296%
NE
Nebraska
1,826,341
913,170.5
0.296%
NV
Nevada
2,700,551
1,350,275.5
0.438%
NV
Nevada
2,700,551
1,350,275.5
0.438%
NH
New Hampshire
1,316,470
658,235.0
0.214%
NH
New Hampshire
1,316,470
658,235.0
0.214%
NJ
New Jersey
8,791,894
4,395,947.0
1.427%
NJ
New Jersey
8,791,894
4,395,947.0
1.427%
NM
New Mexico
2,059,179
1,029,589.5
0.334%
NM
New Mexico
2,059,179
1,029,589.5
0.334%
NY
New York
19,378,102
9,689,051.0
3.144%
NY
New York
19,378,102
9,689,051.0
3.144%
NC
North Carolina
9,535,483
4,767,741.5
1.547%
NC
North Carolina
9,535,483
4,767,741.5
1.547%
ND
*North Dakota*
672,591
336,295.5
0.109%
ND
*North Dakota*
672,591
336,295.5
0.109%
OH
*Ohio*
11,536,504
5,768,252.0
1.872%
OH
*Ohio*
11,536,504
5,768,252.0
1.872%
OK
Oklahoma
3,751,351
1,875,675.5
0.609%
OK
Oklahoma
3,751,351
1,875,675.5
0.609%
OR
Oregon
3,831,074
1,915,537.0
0.622%
OR
Oregon
3,831,074
1,915,537.0
0.622%
PA
*Pennsylvania*
12,702,379
6,351,189.5
2.061%
PA
*Pennsylvania*
12,702,379
6,351,189.5
2.061%
RI
Rhode Island
1,052,567
526,283.5
0.171%
RI
Rhode Island
1,052,567
526,283.5
0.171%
SC
South Carolina
4,625,364
2,312,682.0
0.751%
SC
South Carolina
4,625,364
2,312,682.0
0.751%
SD
South Dakota
814,180
407,090.0
0.132%
SD
South Dakota
814,180
407,090.0
0.132%
TN
Tennessee
6,346,105
3,173,052.5
1.030%
TN
Tennessee
6,346,105
3,173,052.5
1.030%
TX
Texas
25,145,561
12,572,780.5
4.080%
TX
Texas
25,145,561
12,572,780.5
4.080%
UT
Utah
2,763,885
1,381,942.5
0.448%
UT
Utah
2,763,885
1,381,942.5
0.448%
VT
Vermont
625,741
312,870.5
0.102%
VT
Vermont
625,741
312,870.5
0.102%
VA
Virginia
8,001,024
4,000,512.0
1.298%
VA
Virginia
8,001,024
4,000,512.0
1.298%
WA
Washington
6,724,540
3,362,270.0
1.091%
WA
Washington
6,724,540
3,362,270.0
1.091%
WV
*West Virginia*
1,852,994
926,497.0
0.301%
WV
*West Virginia*
1,852,994
926,497.0
0.301%
WI
*Wisconsin*
5,686,986
2,843,493.0
0.923%
WI
*Wisconsin*
5,686,986
2,843,493.0
0.923%
WY
Wyoming
563,626
281,813.0
0.091%
WY
Wyoming
563,626
281,813.0
0.091%
*TOTAL*
308,143,815
100.000%
- dah
On 10/28/2019 9:15 AM, Margaret Groarke wrote:
> What a weird sidebar. You're suggesting that we suggest changing the
> impeachment process right now, as an impeachment process is underway?
> The Senate, in every vote it takes, under- and over- represents people
> based on the state they live in -- Senate votes on impeachment are no
> different in that regard.
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 11:53 AM Steve Hoersting <hoersting at gmail.com
> <mailto:hoersting at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> *The Senate also decides future Presidential debarment... and by a
> majority vote*
>
> It would seem that the Senate, then, operates, on the question of
> re-election, as a kind of Electoral College.
>
> So I cannot wait for all of today’s principled Electoral College
> opponents to rail against — rather than cling to — this debarment
> procedure.
>
> Steve
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 28, 2019, at 11:08 AM, Doug Spencer <dougspencer at gmail.com
> <mailto:dougspencer at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Larry,
>>
>> Adding to Rick's point, the vote whether to disqualify from
>> holding future office requires a separate Senate vote (akin to
>> sentencing) after the Senate votes to convict. Interestingly
>> (problematically?) the vote for disqualification requires a bare
>> majority vote. See more about the history of these votes here:
>> https://nyti.ms/2p4dWQh
>>
>> Best,
>> Doug
>>
>> -----
>> *Douglas M. Spencer*
>> /Professor of Law & Public Policy/
>> University of Connecticut
>> (860) 993-6217 | dougspencer.org
>> <https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADdjMTM4NDQ4LTcwMWItNDdjNS04NzE5LTRjM2M4ZGVkYmRlNwAQAPIDthE3ukiwo%2Bw59d9Ph9s%3D>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:03 AM Pildes, Rick
>> <rick.pildes at nyu.edu <mailto:rick.pildes at nyu.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> Larry, the Senate has the power to decide, as part of a
>> conviction, whether also to bar the person from future
>> national office. That does not follow automatically from
>> conviction but can and has been added to Senate impeachment
>> convictions.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rick
>>
>> Richard H. Pildes
>>
>> Sudler Family Professor of Constitutional Law
>>
>> NYU School of Law
>>
>> 40 Washington Sq. So.
>>
>> NYC, NY 10012
>>
>> 212 998-6377
>>
>> *From:* Law-election
>> [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
>> <mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>] *On
>> Behalf Of *larrylevine at earthlink.net
>> <mailto:larrylevine at earthlink.net>
>> *Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2019 10:59 AM
>> *To:* 'Election Law Listserv' <law-election at uci.edu
>> <mailto:law-election at uci.edu>>
>> *Subject:* [EL] After impeachment and removal
>>
>> If a President is impeached and then convicted by the Senate
>> and removed from office, could he run again for President at
>> the next election? I know this once would have seem a
>> preposterous notion, but we are living in preposterous times.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
>> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
>> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
>
> --
> *Margaret Groarke*
> /Professor, Political Science/
> /Coordinator, Community Engaged Learning/
> https://jaspercommunityengagement.blogspot.com//
> /
> //
> Riverdale, NY 10471
> Phone: 718-862-7943
> Fax: 718-862-8044
> margaret.groarke at manhattan.edu <mailto:name.name at manhattan.edu>
> www.manhattan.edu <http://www.manhattan.edu/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
--
Simple Instant Runoff Election Ballot
Acceptable candidates, in the order you prefer them:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
(...)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20191028/9ae046f4/attachment.html>
View list directory