Oregon Republicans facing arrest

[Akaran Islands]

No she actually isn't, as they have broken no laws.

The state police were therefore following an illegal order? The state constitution says the majority party can compel legislators to attend.

also please answer this: The legislators are free to vote no on the bill. There are there to represent not obstruct.

What would your solution be to this supposed imposition by seventy percent of the state?

You are aware of how an election works for both the legislature and statewide offices correct?

Will then I was wrong about that, she is within her right to send the police. I've already answered you're "they can vote no" argument. I am aware they are there to represent, they are there to represent their constituents. By delaying that bill from being passed they are protecting the interests of those people.

[The Emerald Legion]

No, I'm saying that people have the right to protest and resist laws which affect them where people like them had little to no say in whether or not it was past. There are many obvious solutions to other than "don't let Portland have any say" such as a compromise between rural and urban areas on serious matter like these.

They can vote no on the bill. There are there to represent not obstruct.

What would your solution be to this supposed imposition by the majority of the state?

You are aware of how an election works for both the legislature and statewide offices correct?

So I'm sure you're quite against the truly landslide number of frivolous court cases where liberal groups have sued the Trump Administration for basic policy decisions?

[San Lumen]

The state police were therefore following an illegal order? The state constitution says the majority party can compel legislators to attend.

also please answer this: The legislators are free to vote no on the bill. There are there to represent not obstruct.

What would your solution be to this supposed imposition by seventy percent of the state?

You are aware of how an election works for both the legislature and statewide offices correct?

Will then I was wrong about that, she is within her right to send the police. I've already answered you're "they can vote no" argument. I am aware they are there to represent, they are there to represent their constituents. By delaying that bill from being passed they are protecting the interests of those people.

Why not do it for every bill except the budget and nomination since it’s bring imposed on them

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The state police were therefore following an illegal order? The state constitution says the majority party can compel legislators to attend.

also please answer this: The legislators are free to vote no on the bill. There are there to represent not obstruct.

What would your solution be to this supposed imposition by seventy percent of the state?

You are aware of how an election works for both the legislature and statewide offices correct?

Will then I was wrong about that, she is within her right to send the police. I've already answered you're "they can vote no" argument. I am aware they are there to represent, they are there to represent their constituents. By delaying that bill from being passed they are protecting the interests of those people.

What this kind of highlights, at least to me, is issues of state level gerrymandering.

[San Lumen]

Will then I was wrong about that, she is within her right to send the police. I've already answered you're "they can vote no" argument. I am aware they are there to represent, they are there to represent their constituents. By delaying that bill from being passed they are protecting the interests of those people.

What this kind of highlights, at least to me, is issues of state level gerrymandering.

Oregon’s legislative lines are for the most part fairly drawn and clean looking

[Scomagia]

Will then I was wrong about that, she is within her right to send the police. I've already answered you're "they can vote no" argument. I am aware they are there to represent, they are there to represent their constituents. By delaying that bill from being passed they are protecting the interests of those people.

Why not do it for every bill except the budget and nomination since it’s bring imposed on them

You have been told already. Stop asking the same stupid question.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

What this kind of highlights, at least to me, is issues of state level gerrymandering.

Oregon’s legislative lines are for the most part fairly drawn and clean looking

Are they? The absence of these senators seem to indicate that there's a problem. I can be way off, of course, but it is a subject I've seen crop up a lot regarding this incident.

[San Lumen]

Oregon’s legislative lines are for the most part fairly drawn and clean looking

Are they? The absence of these senators seem to indicate that there's a problem. I can be way off, of course, but it is a subject I've seen crop up a lot regarding this incident.

70 percent of the state population is in the Willamette Valley. They therefore get the most representation.

[Akaran Islands]

Will then I was wrong about that, she is within her right to send the police. I've already answered you're "they can vote no" argument. I am aware they are there to represent, they are there to represent their constituents. By delaying that bill from being passed they are protecting the interests of those people.

Why not do it for every bill except the budget and nomination since it’s bring imposed on them

Because as much as you like to pretend, Republicans are willing to cooperate and accept losses from the Democrats. However in cases like these, they cannot just sit by and allow a bill to pass that will completely ruin the livelihoods of their constituents.

[San Lumen]

Why not do it for every bill except the budget and nomination since it’s bring imposed on them

Because as much as you like to pretend, Republicans are willing to cooperate and accept losses from the Democrats. However in cases like these, they cannot just sit by and allow a bill to pass that will completely ruin the livelihoods of their constituents.

Then vote no. Dont upend the government and stop it from functioning and not condemn the support of armed militia groups or threaten the state police.

[Scomagia]

Because as much as you like to pretend, Republicans are willing to cooperate and accept losses from the Democrats. However in cases like these, they cannot just sit by and allow a bill to pass that will completely ruin the livelihoods of their constituents.

Then vote no. Dont upend the government and stop it from functioning and not condemn the support of armed militia groups or threaten the state police.

It's a perfectly valid and legal parliamentary tactic. Stop whining.

[Akaran Islands]

Because as much as you like to pretend, Republicans are willing to cooperate and accept losses from the Democrats. However in cases like these, they cannot just sit by and allow a bill to pass that will completely ruin the livelihoods of their constituents.

Then vote no. Dont upend the government and stop it from functioning and not condemn the support of armed militia groups or threaten the state police.

Are you joking? I've addressed this like four times already

[San Lumen]

Then vote no. Dont upend the government and stop it from functioning and not condemn the support of armed militia groups or threaten the state police.

It's a perfectly valid and legal parliamentary tactic. Stop whining.

Ok then since you'd established this precedent when Democrats do the same in red states will you sing the same tune?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Are they? The absence of these senators seem to indicate that there's a problem. I can be way off, of course, but it is a subject I've seen crop up a lot regarding this incident.

70 percent of the state population is in the Willamette Valley. They therefore get the most representation.

The problem is that other districts are feeling at a disadvantage here. With a legislature that, has a certain majority and able to redraw districts boundaries, I can definitely see why people are accusing the Democratic majority in OR of gerrymandering. I am a Democrat myself, FYI. No, I'm not an Oregonian, which is why I admit I can be wrong.

[San Lumen]

70 percent of the state population is in the Willamette Valley. They therefore get the most representation.

The problem is that other districts are feeling at a disadvantage here. With a legislature that, has a certain majority and able to redraw districts boundaries, I can definitely see why people are accusing the Democratic majority in OR of gerrymandering. I am a Democrat myself, FYI. No, I'm not an Oregonian, which is why I admit I can be wrong.

Its not gerrymandering. The lines are fairly drawn for the most part. 70 percent of the state population is in that region therefore they get the most seats. The rural part of the state contains only a small part of the population therefore they dont have many seats.


That's how apportionment works in a representative democracy.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The problem is that other districts are feeling at a disadvantage here. With a legislature that, has a certain majority and able to redraw districts boundaries, I can definitely see why people are accusing the Democratic majority in OR of gerrymandering. I am a Democrat myself, FYI. No, I'm not an Oregonian, which is why I admit I can be wrong.

Its not gerrymandering. The lines are fairly drawn for the most part. 70 percent of the state population is in that region therefore they get the most seats. That's how apportionment works in a representative democracy.

Some constituents in OR aren't in agreement, though.

[San Lumen]

Its not gerrymandering. The lines are fairly drawn for the most part. 70 percent of the state population is in that region therefore they get the most seats. That's how apportionment works in a representative democracy.

Some constituents in OR aren't in agreement, though.

It doesnt matter. They have less population they get less seats. Simple concept.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Some constituents in OR aren't in agreement, though.

It doesnt matter. They have less population they get less seats. Simple concept.

It doesn't matter when you have constituents who are dissatisfied with the district boundaries and for feeling like they're not represented?

[San Lumen]

It doesnt matter. They have less population they get less seats. Simple concept.

It doesn't matter when you have constituents who are dissatisfied with the district boundaries and for feeling like they're not represented?

Their districts reflect their population and how sparsely populated it is. What would your solution be?

[Galloism]

The problem is that other districts are feeling at a disadvantage here. With a legislature that, has a certain majority and able to redraw districts boundaries, I can definitely see why people are accusing the Democratic majority in OR of gerrymandering. I am a Democrat myself, FYI. No, I'm not an Oregonian, which is why I admit I can be wrong.

Its not gerrymandering. The lines are fairly drawn for the most part. 70 percent of the state population is in that region therefore they get the most seats. The rural part of the state contains only a small part of the population therefore they dont have many seats.


That's how apportionment works in a representative democracy.

Fair to note - Oregon has a fairly high performance gap, and is heavily gerrymandered.

https://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_Oregon

n Oregon, there were four competitive races for the Oregon House of Representatives in 2012, compared to three in 2010. There were five mildly competitive House races in 2012, compared to nine in 2010. This amounted to a net loss of three competitive elections.

The lines are drawn in such a way that the composition of the legislature is damn near fixed. You'll notice, this is a classic gerrymandering tactic - in 3 of the 4 representative elections that voted democrat, the gap was between 10-20%, while in the sole district that voted Republican, the vote was 43.7%. This is called packing, which you pack as many reliable voters for the opponent into a single district, in order to get your party more representatives at closer (but still insurmountable) margins.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

It doesn't matter when you have constituents who are dissatisfied with the district boundaries and for feeling like they're not represented?

Their districts reflect their population and how sparsely populated it is. What would your solution be?

I'd first of all would listen to the constituents, why they feel this way. Then I'd check that indeed, gerrymandering is not being an issue. If it isn't, things go as usual. If it is a problem, I'd have the drawing of district boundaries done by a multi-partisan commission. Something that, in the case of OR, has already been suggested.

[San Lumen]

Its not gerrymandering. The lines are fairly drawn for the most part. 70 percent of the state population is in that region therefore they get the most seats. The rural part of the state contains only a small part of the population therefore they dont have many seats.


That's how apportionment works in a representative democracy.

Fair to note - Oregon has a fairly high performance gap, and is heavily gerrymandered.

https://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_Oregon

n Oregon, there were four competitive races for the Oregon House of Representatives in 2012, compared to three in 2010. There were five mildly competitive House races in 2012, compared to nine in 2010. This amounted to a net loss of three competitive elections.

The lines are drawn in such a way that the composition of the legislature is damn near fixed. You'll notice, this is a classic gerrymandering tactic - in 3 of the 4 representative elections that voted democrat, the gap was between 10-20%, while in the sole district that voted Republican, the vote was 43.7%. This is called packing, which you pack as many reliable voters for the opponent into a single district, in order to get your party more representatives at closer (but still insurmountable) margins.

Im looking at the maps for congress and the state legislature. They seem fairly drawn and clean looking.

[San Lumen]

Their districts reflect their population and how sparsely populated it is. What would your solution be?

I'd first of all would listen to the constituents, why they feel this way. Then I'd check that indeed, gerrymandering is not being an issue. If it isn't, things go as usual. If it is a problem, I'd have the drawing of district boundaries done by a multi-partisan commission. Something that, in the case of OR, has already been suggested.

I would have no issue with a non partisan commission drawing legislative lines but to honest even under a commission drawn map you'd very likely wind up with a very similar result in the legislature due to population density

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I'd first of all would listen to the constituents, why they feel this way. Then I'd check that indeed, gerrymandering is not being an issue. If it isn't, things go as usual. If it is a problem, I'd have the drawing of district boundaries done by a multi-partisan commission. Something that, in the case of OR, has already been suggested.

I would have no issue with a non partisan commission drawing legislative lines but to honest even under a commission drawn map you'd very likely wind up with a very similar result in the legislature due to population density

This, at the very least, warrants a look and it's not irrelevant.

[Scomagia]

It's a perfectly valid and legal parliamentary tactic. Stop whining.

Ok then since you'd established this precedent when Democrats do the same in red states will you sing the same tune?

If it's used as an opposition to a bill that would actively harm their constituents or a bill they would reasonably perceive as doing so? Yes, absolutely. I'm not an ideologue. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, as far as I'm concerned.

And the precedent is long since established by both parties.