Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Legislature – Question 2
Question for Cequita E, Cashendra J, and Julie Kate K. South Carolina
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
One of the biggest advantages of single member districts opposed to multi-member districts is that the legislator is more concerned with it’s particular districts affairs. Obviously, the single member district approach tends to be more caring and concerned. This approach allows the legislator to bring up district issues during meetings, which helps the problems of that particular district get solved. Since South Carolina is so small, the legislative districts are small; therefore, they have more of an “influence upon their state legislators.” The type of effect the single member district has in politics can be compared to the teacher to student ratio in classrooms. The fewer amounts of students in a classroom make it easier for teachers to help their individual needs.
Julie Kate Keeney
With South Carolina using a single member district it is a plus for the state. There would be no problem for the district at hand for getting an response quicker and resolved much quicker than the multi-member district strategy. With a single member approach the individuals would be in more connection and concern for the well being of the that district. Also with South Carolina being as small as it is the district are not that big so everyone is pretty much well in connection of what’s going on and in some cases probably could even relate between districts. The single member district is a great way for South Carolina.
Cequita D Edmond
Both Julie Kate and Cequita gave excellent answers to this question, accurately reflecting what the text said.
However, the text oversimplifies this because there is another side to the coin. Having small relatively homogeneous districts encourages legislators to reflect the needs of those in their districts, to be sure, but the flip side of this is that in doing this they tend to sacrifice the greater good of the state as a whole for the narrow interests of their districts. This narrow district orientation makes compromise difficult (who in your small district will reward you for sacrificing their interests for the good of the whole state?)
So we have the situation we face today -- because some legislators from tobacco producing areas of the state oppose increasing tobacco taxes and care little for how others feel, any tax increase is doomed. (This is from the headlines of today, the last day of the legislature in 2007.) We will continue to have the lowest tobacco taxes in the nation and will do little to discourage youth smoking.
Post a Comment