Hungarian mothers to get extra votes for their children...

Post Reply New Topic

It reminded me of 3/5 rule too.
The slaveowner didnt actually get more than one vote, but congressional representation (then as now) was parceled out by population. So black slaves were counted as 3/5 of person when totalling a states population before calculating the congressional seats.

This way blacks were 3/5ths "represented" in congress despite the fact that they were not allowed to vote.
Which in effect meant that free whites (slaveowning or not) in slaveowning states got more congressional representation per capita. So whites in slave states in a roundabout way did get more power per capita in congress than whites in free states.
Whites in the south wouldve prefered that blacks be counted as full humans. Whites in the north and abolitionists of either color in either region wouldve prefered blacks not be counted as "people" at all for this purpose so that the non slave states would get the voting power.

Though giving extra votes to mothers (or widowed dads) for each child they have is not as outrrageous as rewarding you for living in a slave state it still rather questionable.

On the plus side it gives power to people who are responsible for children,and have a stake in posteriety, in education, and so forth. So maybe its fair to give moms more of a vote. But it puts more power into the hands of people with larger families. I would think it would also encourage a higher birthrate.

In a big multi ethnic country like the usa it would do more than favor moms and kids, it would also favor certain classes, races, and religions, that tend have larger families.

Europe (on both sides of the Iron Curtain-both before and after the fall of the iron curtain) had a declining birth rate for decades
My guess is that this voting thing maybe a bid to bolster the birthrate of Hungary-which may well have a lower than replacement birth rate.

Hungary is probably one of the few countries that could get away with this because it is both ethncally homogeneous and has a low birth rate. Third world countries should not try this because of their high birthrates. Any large diverse country like the USA, or India, shouldnt touch the idea.

I think it's a great idea.
Mom and Dad should each get an extra 1/2 vote per child, unless one of them is not supporting the child or is deceased. In those cases, the other parent gets the full extra vote. Why shouldn't children be represented, and who better to represent them than their parents?
Parents voting on their childrens' behalfs still follows the rule of "one person, one vote".
One rich guy getting lots of votes does not follow that rule.

^^^ Um....yes, the parents would vote for their children. That's the idea.

No it's not really fair then, is it? Really, it just means the adults getting another vote.

It's a stupid idea.

I think it's a slightly odd way to go about it, but I am in favour of giving children more of a voice.

As someone without children, I'm not sure how I would feel about a fertile woman on my street getting more votes than me though. I'd rather see the age of voting lowered.

I was pretty politically aware by the age of 10, and probably would have taken voting very seriously. And I'd have objected greatly to my mum voting for me. Teenagers often seem to be the most politically fired up people in society, judging by twitter, or at least fired up by certain issues. Just because we may not think they have the best judgement, I'm not sure it is our right to deprive them of a voice, any more than it was right to deprive black people, women or working class men a voice.

How about dropping the voting age to 14 for a start. They can't cock it up any more than we already have.

Mothers voting on what they think is best does not give the children a voice.

Not that children need a voice anyway. They're still learning how the world works.

This though just came to me about this regarding the extra vote per child.
Using this type of voting system would more or less encourage women to have more children to get more votes.

If you look at weighted voting in the context of company shareholders.
The vote per share system encourages shareholders to buy more share in a company to get more power.