> A further consequence is that the New Haven and other big city
> delegations have much less power on the state level compared to the
> suburbs where registration and turn out is much greater. The machine
> is willing to accept this trade off-a sure lock on local power at the
> expense of disenfranchisement (and ultimately immiseration) of the
> constituency they claim to represent on the state level. While I
> haven't studied the matter-some should-, this same dynamic is likely
> to be operative in most big cities. The bottom line is that the
> Democrats have only themselves to blame for their increasing inability
> to turn out what they claim (increasingly laughably) to be their base.
It doesn't seem to be operative in Philadelphia, unless I am unaware of its operation. On the contrary, Philly Democrats need all the registration and voter turn-out they can get precisely in order to have some decent representation on the state level. And the current governor is the ex-Philly Dem mayor (not someone I am particularly fond of, since he is also an ex-D.A., whom we are fighting on the death penalty issue).
I would guess that New York City Dems are not trying to keep registration down, either, but someone who knows NYC politics could enlighten us on that.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ Belinda: Ay, but you know we must return good for evil. Lady Brute: That may be a mistake in the translation.
-- Sir John Vanbrugh: The Provok’d Wife (1697), I.i.