Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the civic illiteracy of the illiberal Left
By: Becket Adams
Emphasis mine.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Of all the threats facing the republic, few seem so great as the lawmaker who lacks even a third grader's understanding of U.S. civics.
Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez falsely claimed this week that she represents more people than Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin. Worse, she suggested there's something wrong with Congress because the wants of her congressional district don't carry equal weight in the Senate.
Manchin announced this weekend he is a "no" on President Joe Biden's multitrillion-dollar social spending and climate change bill.
Incensed, Ocasio-Cortez, who works in a separate chamber of Congress, attacked the senator later on MSNBC, decrying his failure to serve the people of New York's 14th Congressional District.
"The idea that Joe Manchin says he can't explain this back home to his people is a farce," the congresswoman said.
It's a "farce," she continued, because insofar as pure democracy is concerned, "I represent more or ... just as many or more people than Joe Manchin does. Perhaps more."
Well, no.
Again, Manchin represents the state of West Virginia, which has a population of roughly 1,793,716, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Ocasio-Cortez, on the other hand, represents a single congressional district, which has a population of roughly 696,664.
But Ocasio-Cortez's remarks aren't a failure of basic math (or research). They're a failure of basic civics.
The congresswoman works in the House, which represents the electorate by population. Manchin works in the Senate, which represents the interests of the state. This is by design, as, again, most third graders can tell you. The entire point of the Senate is to protect the states from the tyranny of the majority.
Even if the population of Ocasio-Cortez's district was greater than the state of West Virginia, which it isn't, the purpose of the Senate is to ensure West Virginia has as much say in Congress as New York. The Senate is the mechanism by which every state is protected from being steamrolled by states with denser populations. The Senate protects West Virginia from New York as much as it protects Rhode Island from Texas.
While we're at it, it's worth noting a recent YouGov survey found 53% of West Virginians support scrapping Biden's social spending and climate change bill. A mere 32% said they support Congress passing the bill.
Meanwhile, at MSNBC, Ocasio-Cortez continued to rail against Manchin, claiming the Senate must be reformed because it doesn't operate as a pure democracy. (This is the point!)
"It is unconscionable," she said, "the way that the Senate operates. It's fundamentally undemocratic."
Ocasio-Cortez continued, adding there needs to be a "crackdown on the Senate" and that someone needs to "implement some institutional discipline."
"We cannot allow ... the climate crisis to become a catastrophe," she said, "which is what is represented right now with this bill going by the wayside or being trimmed down any further. Because, as I've said in the House Democratic caucus, some of us are actually going to have to live on this planet in 50 years, and ... what happens right now determines how bad it's going to be."
Personally, I think the more immediately pressing matter is that an increasing number of federal officeholders apparently have no idea how the federal government works. Power and ignorance are a dangerous combination.
Tags
Who is online
40 visitors
Who told you that was the reason for the Senate to exist? They are very wrong. It seems that you don't know much about political science and the US Constitution, but naturally, so are accusing others of your ignorance because they do not agree with you.
My ignorance? Please explain..
Sorry, to put it more succinctly. What do you think the purpose of the Senate is?
Really, so the each state having two Senators was not a compromise between the large and small states to get the US Constitution ratified?
Why do you think the small states were so concerned about having an equal say in at least one branch of Congress? The larger states wanted straight up representation based on population; or amount of taxes paid and defense.
The entire point of the Senate is to make sure states like California and New York don't run rough shod over smaller states at the federal level.
The article is correct, AOC is a threat to our Republic.
The Senate is supposed to be less reactive, more politically stable, and more pragmatic than the House. It has 6-year terms and only 2 senators per state. There is nothing about preventing the tyranny of the majority as the reason for the senate. Who told you that there was?
The Bill of Rights exists to prevent tyranny of the majority because all citizens have equal rights and not just the majority.
Seems someone cannot even figure out that you did not say that and you were quoting the article. Ignorance, or more like arguing for the sake of arguing?
AOC is proof positive that stupid cannot be fixed, just voted out!
All you're doing is proving the subject of the article. Thanks for your comments though.
The same can be said of any of the other Squad members.
I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but according to the Senate itself , protecting minority interests is a fundamental part of why it exists.
Yet a parallel concept on the legislative plane is absurd?
You bet.
The two Senators per state, regardless of that states population, was purposely built to insure more equal representation state to state. This insures that a state like Maine wields the same power in the senate as a state like California. A state with almost 40 times the population of Maine.
This concept IS US Civics 101
You appear to know even less than AOC
Right. And this is why the occasional talk we hear about tying the Senate to population is so baffling. Such a “reform” would defeat the whole point of having a Senate. If legislative representation were only tied to population, we wouldn’t need two houses.
The effect of no accurate US Civics education and/or programming from our US re-education camps. Colleges
Yes the states that happen to be in the minority on an issue...
And in actuality, the Senate was created to give the rich and wealthy a voice in government. that voice was to take place in the individual states political institutions so large amounts of money could not infect the new government... Senators were appointed by the political powers in the individual states to represent the states interests to the federal government...
When the political parties abolished this and pushed through the 17th amendment tying Senators to elections thru popular votes then Senators became nothing more than super representatives, they represent the wealthy's positions and not the states positions anymore... (and of course interjected politics and political money into the senate)
We lost a huge chunk of our individual freedom when that mistake was made...
Prior to the 17th amendment it didn't matter what political party the senator was a part of cause if they didn't satisfy what the state government wanted them to do they were usually out at the next appointment time... States have no control of them anymore... and hence the wealthy have control of at least half the congress.... with the lobbyists turning congress people into millionaires within six months of taking office, they have control of that half as well...
Why do you think all we get is massive all-inclusive bills now that have to be passed before you can find out what is in them... and what is in them usually has little to do with helping the American people...
Big business has been trying to control the government for over a century... with the help of the duped, (liberals and "progressives") they are betting closer and closer...
"I represent more or ... just as many or more people..."
Doesn't matter - the coasties can't gang up on the flyovers.
That is the bottom line here, the bicoastal secular progressive urban elites and their war against the heartland or as you said, flyover country.
If anything it is revealing of where they want to go with the nation and it's government...
You are right about that…
While I agree that anyone serving in office should know basic civics, I was surprised to see that most people still know civics. Here is a civic poll given by the ABA and it is very interesting.
But then again, I found this poll that was scary:
It seems that lack of knowledge of our civics crosses all parties. The whole thing is a bit out there.
Annenberg? a Hard Left liberal thinktank? why are the results not surprising to me? we already know they ting the basic american is stupid...
The ABA on the other hand? I'm surprised they would even publish such a survey.... Maybe they were judging how far they have come in dumbing down the American public... Not far enough I guess..