Democrat Anita Earls to Nullify Rural Voters Choices in Elections

Earls suggests radical change to how we elect Congress, implies too many whites being elected

Democrat candidate for North Carolina Supreme Court Anita Earls would destroy the ability of rural North Carolinians to select their own members of Congress because she doesn't like the choices our voters are making. In a racially charged proposal, she suggests that voters are selecting too many white individuals for congress, but that candidates of color can't compete for votes. Earls recently wrote an article, published by a national magazine, aggressively advocating for the Fair Representation Act, which would permanently alter citizen’s ability to vote for a specific member of congress, require that candidate to have the most votes, or even for members of the public to know who their member of Congress is. This bill would divide North Carolina into three mega-districts and would swap election losers for winners. Some North Carolina voters would get to cast more votes than others, and some would appear to have more congressional representation than others in a scheme she says nationally would elect an additional 30 minority candidates to the U.S. House by not requiring winners receive a majority of the vote, and in fact be considered winners with only 17% of the vote or less. Earls says "it has the power to be transformative," while supporters even say, “The zero-sum, winner-take-all system in which only one person is elected to represent each district no longer works.” In another piece by Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) he talks about how "parties representing as little as 1% of the electorate can gain representation..."



"' As a former member of Congress, I was on the winning and losing side of campaigns, and of course the winner should have the most votes. Anita Earls' race based election scheme would turn democracy on its head, destroy the ability for rural North Carolina to control who represents it in Congress, and simply nullify our democratic system as we know it. - NCGOP Chairman Robin Hayes



As seen in the map (suggested by Earls) voters in rural areas would have their votes overrun by voters from major metropolitan areas, and coastal communities would be have their elected representative chosen by people in land-locked cities. More specifically, the citizens of Charlotte would elect the Congressional Representative for those on the Outer Banks, some 389 miles away. This could effectively eliminate the ability of rural citizens to select an elected officials that represents them.



"In her battle over voting district lines, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Earls' attempts to nullify 3 million voter's choices for legislature cast in 2016. Voters will also nullify Earls' plan to send losers of Congressional Elections to Congress and the ability to pick election winners to represent them," continued Hayes.



In her plan, the "winners" in Congressional Districts only need 17% of the vote. "With ranked-choice voting, winning requires a lower share of the vote," said Earls while detailing her radical proposal through a recent article in The Nation. The article includes heavy racist overtones, implying that too many white individuals are elected to Congress, while also suggesting that minority candidates can't compete in traditional elections.

Earls says her scheme would add 30 minority members of Congress, by having them only need 17% of the vote. "Single-winner districts do not inherently empower people of color. It’s all about making their votes count by putting them in a majority position to elect. Ranked-choice voting in multi-winner districts lowers that threshold, down to 17 percent in a five-winner district—and greatly expands who has the power to elect." (Anita Earls, "Could This Put an End to Gerrymandering?" . "Single-winner districts do not inherently empower people of color. It’s all about making their votes count by putting them in a majority position to elect. Ranked-choice voting in multi-winner districts lowers that threshold, down to 17 percent in a five-winner district—and greatly expands who has the power to elect." (Anita Earls, "Could This Put an End to Gerrymandering?" The Nation , 6/26/2017)



...she suggests that voters are selecting too many white individuals for congress, but that candidates of color can't compete for votes. "Earls praises the plan by saying 'potential minority seats jumps significantly as well, from 71 now to 101.' and '…to guarantee minority representation, African Americans and Latinos will experience greater voting power.'" (Anita Earls, "Could This Put an End to Gerrymandering?" "Earls praises the plan by saying 'potential minority seats jumps significantly as well, from 71 now to 101.' and '…to guarantee minority representation, African Americans and Latinos will experience greater voting power.'" (Anita Earls, "Could This Put an End to Gerrymandering?" The Nation , 6/26/2017)



### Share Tweet Forward