The disenfranchisement of rural America
But a third map (Figure 3) showing the nation’s 3,035 counties in the same color scheme reveals that portraying states as either blue or red obscures much of what we might want to know about the states and the voters who inhabit them. On this map, we see that most of the blue states are in fact mostly red. The reality of vast expanses of red in some of the bluest of states should concern us if we truly care about self-governance.
With each passing election, rural and small town Americans have ever less influence on their state and national governments and ever declining control over the governance of their own communities. Their lives are increasingly controlled from distant state capitals and from the even more distant Washington, D.C., by politicians with little incentive to pay attention to their country cousins. To some extent, their disenfranchisement is the inevitable result of a century of urbanization and economic centralization. But the erosion of self-governance in rural America is also the result of a generally well intentioned but simplistic understanding of democracy and the associated elimination of institutional protections of local democratic governance.
Two ideas have been central to this effective disenfranchisement of rural America. First, that one person/one vote is an inviolable principle of democratic government under the United States Constitution. Second, that the winners of elections owe allegiance only to those who voted for them, no matter how close the margin of victory.











Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Urban areas have the majority of public housing and the like. End of story.
Joey24007 on February 13, 2013 at 9:59 PM
the very sad thing is that urban politics is the politics of machines. Patronage and pay to play is the game. Local news can’t touch this stuff (no snitch rules) so the states become more and more corrupt…as as go the states so goes the nation
and of course, that works out great for the left…the more out of sight and out of reach they are, the better…and so we get things like we have to pass the bill to find out what is in it.
r keller on February 13, 2013 at 10:02 PM
The Constitution, federalism and A republican form of government is supposed to protect us from the tyranny of the majority. Too bad that it turns out that the “Constitution” is living, the “federal” government is imperialist, and the majority rules.
besser tot als rot on February 13, 2013 at 10:04 PM
And soon the USPS will start charging more to deliver to rural homes.
itsnotaboutme on February 13, 2013 at 10:08 PM
No. Mountains and plains and deserts do not vote, people do. Better to fret about how to turn some of that blue Urbanite into red Patriot.
AshleyTKing on February 13, 2013 at 10:09 PM
It’s also about the 17th Amendment. Repeal it already.
ButterflyDragon on February 13, 2013 at 10:13 PM
Hunger Games: Coming to nation near you.
Bishop on February 13, 2013 at 10:16 PM
every good villager should be worth 1.5 times a dirty urbanite. insular world views and provincial ignorance need to have greater influence on our polity.
sesquipedalian on February 13, 2013 at 10:18 PM
Yes, we need more worldly, erudite Obamaphone city dwellers voting more money out of other people’s wallets by keeping Obama in presnit. That’ll get the economy turned around. Nobel winner Paul Krugman say so. Look at the way he pegged that stimulus – genius, that guy.
crrr6 on February 13, 2013 at 10:41 PM
Agreed. Us flyover types just don’t have that urban savoir-faire such as pooping on police cars or holding nude gay-pride parades down main street; we’re pretty ignorant out here clinging to our guns and Bibles.
Bishop on February 13, 2013 at 10:44 PM
What if the local Congressman started to be forbidden by law or House ethics rule from hiring personnel directly from media companies? Make journalists who want to work for their fave Congresscritter spend five years writing press releases for Geekysoft or Wally’s Widgets before they are eligible.
When local media don’t have to worry about messing up their employees’ future political careers, they might stop sitting on so many corruption stories.
Sekhmet on February 13, 2013 at 10:47 PM
It also happens at the state level, and that includes Red States like Texas. Even when you have a state with predominantly conservative voters, if those voters are located in the metropolitan areas, that’s where the representatives are going to end up coming from.
The big fight comes when you have an urban/rural divide on natural resources, which in the western states usually revolves around water rights, but can also involve things like school funding or where to locate things people don’t want, like waste dumps. In the case of, say, pumping underground water 300 miles from rural areas to urban ones, it’s often the rural water users against the urban ones, and in those cases, the ‘R’ or ‘D’ next to the rep’s name doesn’t matter as much as the place where they live.
jon1979 on February 13, 2013 at 10:55 PM
People like him don’t care about disenfranchising suburban/rural folks. The US could annex Greenland as the 51st state, and they’d be happy to foist whatever government takeover they can over the entire expanse because they can demolish the 60k that live there at the polls. Better make it an electric fishing boat, Randver – the overlords in DC say you’re screwing up the environment.
crrr6 on February 13, 2013 at 11:05 PM
Seriously though, it’s easy to complain, as the author does, about the supposed disenfranchisement of rural voters, but neither he nor you propose a solution. The problem you complain of arises because formerly rural voters have voted with their feet and moved to suburbs or cities. Do we prohibit them from voting in their new homes? How do we address your concerns without disenfranchising them?
cam2 on February 13, 2013 at 11:24 PM
EV’s awarded by district across all 50 states.
crrr6 on February 13, 2013 at 11:46 PM
Ignorance is indignant.
Obama won the 2nd round with even more high school dropouts than the first time. Inner cities are about as ignorant as it gets.
Heck, most who voted for him are foolishly ignorant.
Thanks for the laughs.
p.s. they are worth way more than what you mentioned, and they’ll starve you, soon enough.
Schadenfreude on February 13, 2013 at 11:47 PM
And what does the GOP plan to do about it? Oh, that’s right: NOTHING.
The GOP represents wealthy, coastal Democrats while the Democrats represent underclass and wealthy Democrats. Everyone else is just here to pay for it all, shop at the store for Chinese crap, and sit around with our unemployed or underemployed student loan laden kids while Barry and GOP import cheap and skilled foreign labor to compete for what jobs are available.
Punchenko on February 14, 2013 at 12:06 AM
Gentrification should fix the provincial ignorance and urban decay of the dirty urbanites you speak of, Sesquipedalian.
Now then, I wouldn’t necessarily call Marion Barry a provincial who is ignorant, but he is none too happy about what is happening to what used to be his city.
Punchenko on February 14, 2013 at 12:16 AM
The most insular people I’ve ever met are from the city. NYC is by far the most provincial, and DC and Philthy are close.
forest on February 14, 2013 at 1:08 AM
OH PULEEZE! What a LOAD of 0BAMA!
At the last MIGOP Convention we in RURAL Cass County had a 100% attendence from our delegates while from Urban Kalamazoo County ONLY 6 OUT OF 24 DELEGATES SHOWED UP! Who got disenfranchised?
The real problem lays with Americans. For the few here that have decided that the time to stop working feverishly as bench warmers has arrived, you could start here IF you are REALLY WORRIED about being disenfranchised. Then, IF you agree with Brent Bozell’s summation, you might want to start looking for the closest TEA Party group to your location and go to one of their meetings. If not you, who?
It is SO EASY to get involved today, more so than when I searched out my local chapter of the GOP over a decade ago. I had realized that if I weren’t willing to get involved then I deserved the worst the corrupt-o-crats could deliver. That is why I am AGAIN going to the MIGOP Convention as THE elected delegate from my township [for the fourth time], which is being held later this month. I can promise you that the politicians there will be made to sweat when I confront them and there will be absolutely no doubt in their minds as to whose ass they will have to kiss [as Allahpundit so colorfully puts it].
NEVER FORGET! America ALWAYS gets the government it DESERVES, and whiners win nothing!
DannoJyd on February 14, 2013 at 1:11 AM
If the states would just take back their cajones & tell the Fed to eff off, we wouldn’t be having all of these problems.
The states are wh0res for govt $$. Mine of North Dakota is no different.
We’ve got surpluses out the wazzoo, & yet they raised my property taxes by 30 % this year. I can’t even hardly fracking pay what it was before.
NO ONE is spending govt $$ right. State or Federal.
You are right. People are so apathetic that they let the cheats run stuff bcs they’re too lazy to run for office or take the leadership reins themselves.
Leadership is haaaaaarrrrrd & it takes a talent as well to do it right.
I’ve tried for years to get people to change in the small town I teach in. And it does not good. No one will stand with me bcs they are all putzes.
I often feel disenfranchised bcs I live in a very rural area. But in the end, it is up to me to help change those attitudes.
It works a little at a time. Call out the liars & the thieves & the 2 faced jerks in your communities. Shame them, do whatever it is necessary to get out the truth.
If in the end all the people want to ignore the truth, you at least did what you could.
Badger40 on February 14, 2013 at 8:27 AM
There is a big difference however in the results. No one would be making Obama voters work longer hours and send larger checks to Washington D.C. to implement Romney’s plan (…except perhaps in the idea that he wanted everyone to have a good job.) And the fact that the Obama message is to take from the people that work for it to give goodies to the blue speckled voters. There is no comparison to the tyranny of too much government telling you what to do about every aspect of your life and charging you more for things you do not want, as if you can’t think for yourself and make prudent choices.
You see with Romney, Blue State governors could have raised their residents taxes to the sky to pay for the goodies that blue staters think they need, and Red state governors would not have to, and it is precisely that they resent other people not being forced to do what they want that motivates them.
When you add a check off onto a state income tax form, where liberals may choose a higher rate of state taxes for themselves, and leave your rate alone, they won’t do it. Senator Liz Warren, felt really guilty about it, but she did not check off the box to pay a higher rate of MA tax. She is the poster child for the Do-as-I-sayers.
Fleuries on February 14, 2013 at 9:53 AM
There’s this thing called “Federalism” that could solve this problem. If only someone had set up our government that way this wouldn’t be an issue at all. Too bad. It just might have worked.
GWB on February 14, 2013 at 10:32 AM
This would help only if districts were drawn in a non-partisan manner rather than ridiculously gerrymandered by whichever party is in power at the given time.
cam2 on February 14, 2013 at 10:39 AM