United States | News & Politics

3240 readers

885 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

No memes.

Post news related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

simsymbiote@midwest.social

Type1@midwest.social

exposingfash@midwest.social

Texas Senate Passes Map After 2 Democrats Fail to Join House Member Walkout (truthout.org)

submitted 2 weeks ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/usa@midwest.social

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The gerrymander would benefit the GOP and dilute Black and Brown voters’ power. The House may now decide its fate.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

....

Did you not know there's a House AND Senate for every state?

Why are people up voting you for not knowing that?

Am I missing a joke or are people legitimately up voting you because they're confused too?

Edit:

Except Nebraska apparently

[–] anon6789@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

It doesn't help that these articles all get shared at random times. This post is from today, Friday, and it is an article published Thursday, about events that happened Tuesday. So people that heard this same story Tuesday are initially going to think this is a new event that happened today, after the news they heard Tuesday.

Most people here are likely not from Texas, so even though this story is of national interest (possibly to people outside the US also) many may not always remember who has or hasn't voted on things yet.

I'm decently interested in politics, consider myself literate, and as so much news is coming about this topic every day, I still need to check multiple times to see if this is new news or old news and who it's about. Initially I was thinking why can't people tell the difference too, but as time keeps going, this random swirling of posts really doesn't help anyone keep track of what's going on, so I just accept this story is going to be confusing people for the moment. At least people are invested in the outcome, this seems like this may be a key event in US history years from now depending how it plays out.

[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Have no fear, Pedantic Man is here!

Almost every state has a House and a Senate. Nebraska (as well as the Virgin Islands and Guam, if you want to include territorial legislatures) operates a unicameral, technically non-partisan (as in, party affiliation isnt "officially" acknowledged), legislature.

You're welcome, citizen! Pedantic Man, up, up, and away!

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Thanks!

Nebraska dissolved their House in 1930s and while they had good reasons, it passed because of the push to legalize horse betting:

After a trip to Australia in 1931, George W. Norris, then U.S. senator for Nebraska, campaigned for reform, arguing that the bicameral system was based on the non-democratic British House of Lords, and that it was pointless to have two bodies of people doing the same thing and hence wasting money. He specifically pointed to the example of the Australian state of Queensland, which had adopted a unicameral parliament nearly ten years before. In 1934, voters approved a constitutional amendment to take effect with the 1936 elections, abolishing the Nebraska Senate and the Nebraska House of Representatives and granting their powers to a new unicameral body simply called the Nebraska Legislature. At 43 members, the new Nebraska Legislature was closer in size to the old 33-member Nebraska Senate than it was to the old 100-member Nebraska House of Representatives.[7][8]

Many possible reasons for the 1934 amendment's victory have been advanced: the popularity of George Norris; the Depression-era desire to cut costs; public dissatisfaction with the previous year's legislature; or even the fact that, by chance, it was on the ballot in the same year as an amendment to legalize parimutuel betting on horse races.[9] This final coincidence may have aided the measure's passage in Omaha, where the unicameral issue was not a pressing one but horse racing was. (Gambling interests campaigned for "yes" votes on all amendments in hopes of assuring the horse-racing amendment's passage.)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska_Legislature#History

I legitimately didn't know about that

[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Grew up in Nebraska. It's a point of really lame civic pride among the population that paid attention in elementary school social studies.

For some reason, I had it in my head that Maine also operated a unicameral, however that appears to not be the case. They tried to adopt it in 2009, but the measure failed. So, I'm not 100% sure what factoid I'm misremembering, but I know there is some strange kinship between Maine and Nebraska local politics.

[–] bravesilvernest@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I suppose maybe there are some missed context clues, where "they" are House Democrats saying "we've defeated them!" and patting on the back.

Yes, most States do have 2 chambers, I realize that; it's more Dems loudly stating wins that aren't necessarily there.

Edit: it's on me for not stating that chamber diff here