My state senate district (Fort Worth) was stolen by such fraud, I'm convinced. Republican Konni Burton was a shoe-in, but somehow "lost" to a Democratic challenger.
Does anyone care that I've been disenfranchised? Certainly not Democrats.
‘’The Dallas Morning News’’ was pushing the election of Beverly Powell and succeeded.
“Does anyone care that I’ve been disenfranchised? Certainly not Democrats.”
Our being disenfranchised goes way beyond the voter fraud we are seeing in this case, currently in Florida, and starting to be discussed in AZ. We are being disenfranchised by the whole apportionment process which includes illegals in the Census. We used to hear about “one-man, one-vote” to correct racism minimizing the ability of blacks to be elected based on gerrymandered districts. The bigger issue - if anyone is willing to step up and talk about the giant jack-ass in the room - is that the current process for apportionment alots congressional seats based on a census (with estimations) that includes everyone in the country, wheterh legally or not - and excludes US citizens that are abroad on Census day unless they are working for the US Government. While this may make some sense for allocation of resources based on population (even if that is very frustrating) - it absolutely makes no sense when it comes to voting rights of U.S. Citizens.
For example, based on NBCnews.com statistics showing “100% of the vote in” - in Ohio each congressional district had an average of over 271,000 votes cast, while in California each district had an average of less than 140,000 votes cast. Why the big difference? Maybe some due to voter apathy and ignorance in CA, but more to the point is the large number of illegals in California during the last census pumped up their numbers so they got more representatives - and thus the number of citizens legally voting is much less per district that in Ohio, which has less illegals.
While the Constitution mandates a Census - what has been done with the Census is not necessarily required by the Constitution. Congress could pass a law restricting the apportionment to the count of actual citizens.
Article 1, Section 3 requires “an actual Enumeration ... in such manner as [Congress] shall by Law direct” while apportionment of Representatives among the States is “according to their respective Numbers” based on the number of “free Persons,” excluding Indians, and only counting 3/5 of “all other Persons.” The 14th amendment still excluded Indians not taxed with the intent to include all former slaves in the “whole number of persons in each State.” The intent of the Founders was clearly not to count everyone when Indians were specifically not included for purposes of apportionment.
Congress could clarify things by law, potentially the Executive Branch could also do so. A study regarding the difference for the 2000 census showed a net gain of 4 in red states (with CA losing 6 seats in particular).