Here’s a political question to ponder. In a representative democracy, should a public board follow ‘majority rule’ or what might be called ‘plurality rule’?
More specifically, if town residents vote 60 percent to 40 percent against locating a gravel pit near town, should the governing body write rules that sort of prohibit the pit but allow some gravel extraction in a smaller corner of the proposed pit — taking the stated stance that “not everyone gets what they want,” so the board splits the difference?
It’s an interesting twist on majority rule; even plausible. But it gives credence to bad ideas. Take public stoning. If put to a vote and 2 percent thought it was a good idea, should rules be written to stone two out of every 100 violators?
Majority rule is a tenant of democracy precisely because it helps prevent bad ideas from being implemented.
Angelo S. Lynn