The rise of the supermajority
Delaware could be in a world of hurt if the wrong things happen.
I had a stark warning in my e-mail a few weeks back from state Representative Bryan Shupe:
Our founders intelligently designed a system of government to ensure the common good through safeguards preventing any one entity from wielding too much power.
This is threatened in Delaware, where the next election could bring what historian Alexis de Tocqueville called the “tyranny of the majority” to The First State. If the majority party in Delaware wins one additional seat in the Senate and two additional seats in the State House in the 2024 elections, political party ideology will dominate, and could for generations through constitutional changes, suppressing the voice of everyday Delaware residents.
Basically, what Shupe is saying is that the Democrat trifecta in Dover is approaching the level at which they have generational control. In the House the Democrats hold a 26-15 margin, meaning they are two seats short of being able to pass Constitutional amendments by themselves, provided they hold that supermajority through two consecutive legislative sessions. (They already have this power in the Senate, which they control 15-6.)
Delaware citizens already have a disadvantage because (I believe) they are the only state in the union where citizens have no direct say over the state constitution. We don’t vote on constitutional amendments passed by the legislature at the ballot box nor do we have the power to introduce constitutional amendments via petition.
It turns out we only have one power and it would take a miracle in the General Assembly to occur. (See linked article below.) In essence, because the majority of Delaware’s population lives in one Democrat-controlled county, we all have to suffer their whims.
A couple years ago, though, I had a better idea on the subject of redistricting, including a way the people could have a say if enough legislators had their feet held to the fire to make it happen. This one goes back to my monoblogue days.
This is the key response to Shupe’s concern - let’s return to what our Founders intended, at the state level:
To me, it would be worth the court fight certainly required to install this (paleo-Constitutional) system in the Delaware Senate, where the legislative bodies of each county would select seven Senators apiece on staggered terms to serve in the Senate. It would make local elections vastly more important and allow for the counties to have their voice heard, because the individual concerns of Kent and Sussex are drowned out by the massive delegation New Castle brings to the table. News flash: we ain’t NCC down here.
So now let’s talk about Sussex County.
I moved to Delaware in 2019, and at the time my house was in Council District 5, which roughly took in the southernmost quarter of the county, from the outskirts of Sharptown, Maryland where I live to the oceanfront views of Fenwick Island. In 2018 they elected John Rieley as their member of County Council, and that’s all well and good - obviously I had no say since I lived in the wilds of Wicomico County, Maryland at the time.
When redistricting came along, my house was changed over into the now Laurel-centered Council District 1, which in 2020 re-elected longtime member Michael Vincent and shifted southward in redistricting to catch my house. (Most of the former District 5 was split between Districts 1 and 4.) Again, all well and good even though I’ve never met the man. But the election in 2022 involved Council Districts 4 and 5, one of which I no longer lived in. Thus, a situation was created where certain residents of our fair county voted twice in two years for a Council representative (2020 and 2022) while others - like my family and neighbors - go six years between ballots.
To address that issue and ensure continuity of representation, I think it’s time for Sussex County to follow the lead of my former home county of Wicomico and elect two at-large members. The terms can be staggered - say in the 2024 election we elect one new member to a two-year term and one to a four-year, or take the top two with the higher vote-getter securing the four-year gig and second-highest settling in for two years. Regardless of method, it seems more fair to me having lived here over four years and never having a voice.
As to Shupe’s point, though, while he urges us to, “Ask the candidates what they will do to protect against the ‘tyranny of the supermajority,’” it’s pretty obvious to me that one side is more than willing to run roughshod over the rights of the minority when they refer to our nation as a “democracy.” I think it was Ben Franklin who said something along the lines of a democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what was for lunch. But I’m not a sheep and they don’t represent all of our interests, since our self-interest is best served by maximizing personal liberty, not government control.