Subject: counties, 1vote1value
From: "Graeme Orr" <g.orr@mailbox.gu.edu.au>
Date: 10/24/2002, 6:55 PM
To: election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu

In reply to Jim's conundrum about 1v1v and small vs large counties, is it not a question of how you conceive 'representation'?

A mayor/county commissioner represents a single geo-political entity.   Residents are all constituents (constitutive electoral parts) of that entity.  1v1v matters because I want my voice equal to all relevant others - ie those within that entity - in the shaping of the political obligation of the representative to govern that entity.   I want my voice presented equally vis a vis the other 'choosers' of the mayor/commissioner, because the alternative will encourage the mayor/commissioner to distort governance to favour the weightier voice.

I would only be jealous of my cousins in a neighbouring entity if I saw the mayor/commissioner in a service role. That is, as attending to me as an individual. (The analogy being with the child of the small family, versus a very large family, having more access to parental attention).   That model is inapt, except in very, very small districts.   The mayor/commissioner in reality balances his attention amongst a plurality of interest groups.  My real interest then is in not having my interest group(s)/communities of interest  diluted by gerrymandered boundary drawing.

Wanting to be in a smaller district merely so my vote is worth 1/20 000th of a seat rather than 1/60 000th is about as rational as wearing a hard hat around in case of meteorites.

I confess you might undermine my argument by drilling down a level.  If my real interest is in my interest group, then I am favoured by being in a smaller political entity because my voice within that interest group, all other things being equal, is louder because the interest group is smaller too.

[nb - funnily enough, in Australia the apparent favouritism of smaller entities usually gets inverted as a NEGATIVE.  The sparsely populated local government or state is pitied as 'over-governed' for having too many politicians jostling each other and requiring gravy train working conditions!]

Graeme Orr, Griffith Law School, Brisbane, Australia