XPost: talk.politics.drugs, talk.politics.guns, alt.current-events.usa   
   XPost: talk.politics.misc, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa.republican   
   XPost: alt.politics.bush, alt.law-enforcement   
   From: erj66@xs4all.nl   
      
   On 27-11-2003 17:10, in article   
   3513d8b1.0311270810.6494b771@posting.google.com, "ulTRAX"   
    wrote:   
      
   > In the book "How Democratic is the American Constitution" by   
   > Robert Dahl he calculates that the vote of a US citizen in Wyoming can   
   > weigh some 375% more than a vote of US citizen in California.   
   One always has the option of moving to Wyoming. In any case, coming from a   
   small state, I can tell you, your state never wins.   
      
    What   
   > moral justification is there for ANY citizen to get a bigger vote than   
   > another?   
   To prevent tyranny of the majority. I for one would not want to live in a   
   country where 50% +1 person could decide anything and everything for the   
   other 50%-1.   
      
      
   > Such vote weighing schemes are UNCONSTITUTIONAL on EVERY   
   > level of our government except federal.   
      
   But they are not at the federal level. I would suggest that the decisions   
   supporting the unconstitutionality of such vote weighing schemes should be   
   overturned.   
      
   If it is constitutional by virtue of the constitution being so constructed,   
   it should not prevent copies of itself.   
      
      
   EJ   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)