Emily Keener was voted off The Voice. What does that have to do with politics? Stephanie Gustafson:
Keener’s elimination was especially disappointing in light of last night’s remarkable performance. She took on the beautiful song “Lilac Wine” and, wow, talk about impressive! The coaches were clearly pleased, as evidenced by their standing ovation. Pharrell was thankful that America had the chance to witness Keener’s talent, which has blown him away from the beginning. Christina Aguilera also praised Keener, claiming that her performance was, up until that point, the best of the night.
She was voted off because not enough of the voting public liked her. What does ‘like’ have to do with it? How are voters qualified to determine what is good singing talent?
Ilya Somin on a Supreme Court decision two weeks ago.
The Supreme Court today issued its decision in Evenwel v. Abbott, an important case addressing the meaning of the “one person, one vote” principle. In a rare show of unanimity on an important issue, the Court was unanimous in concluding that states may, if they wish, apportion legislative districts by total population rather than by the total number of eligible voters or registered voters. It did not resolve the issue of whether states are actually required to use the total population standard, and thereby forbidden to adopt any of the several other plausible interpretations of “one person, one vote.”
In other words, it’s not a requirement, but states can do it if they wish.
My question is, why should every person get only one vote? That makes the votes of the completely uninformed– and there are many of them– the same value as those who are well educate, well informed, and more capable of making a decision to vote based more on merits than heated emotion.
How about one vote for everyone, but two votes for more educated (take a test), and three votes for those who are more thoughtful and considerate (and pass yet another test)?
It wouldn’t be as much fun to watch but the country might run better.