> It is rare, in the US at least, for any representative or direct democratic situation to ask for unanimous consent. Someone will almost certainly disagree once you get past 1 voter (or one representative), and possibly they'll disagree with themselves.
Just because something passes by a margin of, let's say a hypothetical margin of 51/49, you're right that it didn't require unanimous consent but if you ignore the concerns of that other 49 and decide not to at least understand, represent parts of or compromise on certain aspects of an issue you're going to just create a situation of hostility for a large group of people that eventually leads to bigger issues.
As to your explanation/example, sure and I don't have an argument against that because I don't disagree with it. I would vote for municipal broadband and think the state is over stepping it's bounds here.
Just because something passes by a margin of, let's say a hypothetical margin of 51/49, you're right that it didn't require unanimous consent but if you ignore the concerns of that other 49 and decide not to at least understand, represent parts of or compromise on certain aspects of an issue you're going to just create a situation of hostility for a large group of people that eventually leads to bigger issues.
As to your explanation/example, sure and I don't have an argument against that because I don't disagree with it. I would vote for municipal broadband and think the state is over stepping it's bounds here.