He proposed. We researched.
Michael Mechanic at Mother Jones:
Mormons wouldĀ probably be psyched. The Republican Party less so. Iām talking about what would happen if we embraced the idea,Ā proposed byĀ Donald Trumpās running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vanceāisnāt he funny?āof empowering families by giving parents of young children an extra vote for each child. Besides being likely unconstitutional (see the unanimous 2016 Supreme Court ruling inĀ Evenwel v. Abbott, whichĀ upheld the 14th Amendment principleĀ of āone person, one voteā) such a policy would be difficult to implement. Who gets the extra votes if thereās an odd number of kids and/or the parents are estranged or have opposing views? Who votes on behalf of stepkidsādo they count? Adoptees? How about kids living with their grandparents? Noncitizen parents? Parents with Green Cards? CouldĀ undocumentedĀ parents vote on behalf of US-born offspring? And how would you verify all of it? To be fair, in an interview over the weekend, Vance clarified that his proposal was simply a āthought experiment.ā Okay then! Letās think it through.
Assuming this proposal were legal and workable, whom would it benefit? Certainly the Mormons, who are known forĀ prolific procreationĀ (in 2014, according to aĀ Pew Research report, Mormon couples ages 40-59 had an average of 3.4 children vs. 2.2 for all Christians and 2.1 nationallyāthey also famously have a history of havingĀ too many spouses.) Mormons tend to be conservative and vote Republican. But only about 1.2 percent of AmericansĀ identifed as MormonsĀ in 2022, per theĀ Washington Post. So who else might benefit? Predicting voter preference and its impact on a given race is complicated and involves various interrelated factors: One must consider a given groupās cohesiveness, political tendencies, and likelihood of turnout, in addition to age, education, income, and geographical concentrationāfor example, Michiganās Somali diaspora, Hawaiiās large Pacific Islander population, and Mexican Americans in the Southwest.
[...] I also poked around for useful data. The Census Bureauās 2023 Current Population Survey breaks down, by race and income, households with children under 18. Thatās useful, because income is a rough proxy for education, and families with less education tend to have more children, Frey told me.
Non-Hispanic whites are significantly under-represented among parent households with incomes of less than $75,000āwhich account for 38 percent of all families with young childrenāwhile Latinos are substantially over-represented. In the slightly larger and more educated middle tier, households with $75,000-$199,999 in income, Asians and non-Hispanic whites are slightly over-represented while Black and Hispanic households are slightly under-represented. In the high-income tier ($200,000-plus), non-Hispanic whites and Asians are strongly over-represented while Black and Hispanic households are strongly under-representedābut only 17 percent of all families with young kids fall into this high-income, high-education, and likely high-turnout group. [...] There's also an X-factor to consider: Might the promise of extra votes serve as an incentive for parents who might not otherwise do so to get out and exercise their patriotic duty, potentially narrowing ethnic and educational turnout disparities?
JD Vanceās experiment of permitting parents who have children to have extra votes might come back to bite him, as it could end up benefitting Democrats.










