Should we have proportional rep and instant run off voting?

[booley]

I could be wrong. I am sure many of you will tell me that I am wrong.

But living in a deeply purple state (Missouri) it occurs to me that one of the reasons that our politicians may seem to not represent us is that they don't. They only represent those that voted for them and gave them money.

I know..duh.

So what if we had proportional representation like they do other countries? Rather then winner takes all, the winner takes most and the rest goes to those running up?

This is a tall order. We would have to pass a constitutional amendment. But it's a lot better idea then banning gay marriage or outlawing flag burning. People actually would benefit. And we toss that myth that Liberals never have ideas. Even though it will take a long time, if it ever happens, it would highlight the inequities of the system, get people talking hopefully act as a platform to pass other voting reforms.

In the meantime, we could also work to have instant run off voting. If you don't know what this is, here' s some info.. http://www.fairvote.org/irv/whatis2.htm

This would require little to no finagling with the constitution (which shouldn't be done without a really good reason anyway, i think we all agree). it's already being used in many areas of the US. it also would spur our grass roots (since the best way to do this is campaign to get as many elections as possible to do this) and remove the Spoiler candidate, since no one would be "wasting their vote". For all of us progressives, imagine if we could still have given all of our votes to Kerry but also made it clear that he was our SECOND choice for the more progressive candidate.

So I'm just putting this out here to get what you all think...

[SteppingRazor]

1. PV!

I'm a huge advocate of proportional representation. This system works! Yes, it allows for small minorities in Congress to be taken up by wacko fringe groups on either side of the political spectrum, but overall it's far better at representing the public. It would mean the death of the two-party system, though, so I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to happen.

[serryjw]

2. Only if you want a democracy

where minority voices are heard

[dcfirefighter]

3. Been a fan for some time

There are better methods than IRV, such as Single Transferrable Vote, or my favorite, Ranked-Pairs, a variation of Condorcet's Method.

Any of them would be progress though. Unfortunately, the power elite in each party would be against it. The old fear was the the democrats would never go for it because it would fracture the party into several minorities (socialists, labor, old dem, etc.). I think the possibility exists even more so on the other side of the aisle, as old-school conservatives, right-wing fundamentalists, neocons, and libertarians gravitate to their own parties.

Even if that were the case, people would be better represented, and people would be better off.

As for PR in most multi-seat elections, I prefer an open-list mixed member proportional election: roughly half the representatives are elected from geographic districts, and the other half are elected to balance the party vote. For example in a 10 district state, whoever has the majority in each district represents everyone in the district. With MMD, 5 representatives would represent everyone in their district, and the other 5 would be elected to make the vote proportional by party.

The key, in each case, is grass roots activism. Change the election process for you neighborhood associations, and social clubs. Change the election process for your local government. Change the election process for your county government. Then work on the state, and the nation.

[carnie_sf]

4. Abso-friggin-lutely

PR is the only we will ever get rid of government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations short of armed revolt.

[Disturbed]

5. I voted YES,

It is way past time that Amerika not be dominated by the "lesser of two evils".

[carnie_sf]

10. With you all the way on that one

I, for one, would like to see the greens be more of a presence

[booley]

6. IRV is a good first step.

I can see a lot of the dem elite not being so in favor of this.

And the last thing the neo or theo cons want is for the rest of the country to have any say.

But IRV is supposed to be a method endorsed by Dean and other bing name dems. And this can eb a grass roots effort. This goes for if there is a better method then IRV.

Every city, every country every state that does IRV (or equivelent) turns the tide our way. So we don't even need to take on the whole country at once.

[MissMarple]

7. Absolutely! They are progressive.

And I'm nodding like a bobble headed doll. Both could end the absolute stranglehold the two parties have on our political processes. But the RNC and the DLC will fight to the death to prevent either from happening. Hmmmm..... :-)

[booley]

8. yeah BUT..

what i am saying is IRV can start at the grass roots and in local elections and work up. Every election that uses IRV makes the case for doing it even stronger.

[MissMarple]

9. I agree with you. And I'm guessing that's how it will happen.

The DLC tried to shut Howard Dean out, but that didn't happen. And, I'm assuming, since Dean is in this for the long term, working with the grassroots makes even more sense and is actually a viable way to go. In the end that will be a death knell for the DLC and the RNC. They will fight it, but they will become...like the dinosaurs. Maybe. Hopefully, we can take our country back. IRV and PR can give us the edge against the power brokers, the special interests, the control freaks. I'll work for either or both, whichever takes hold locally. :-)

[Hippo_Tron]

11. I'd settle for an end to the EC and Gerrymandering

[redqueen]

12. Yes, both.

I'm curious about the no votes... would anyone that voted no care to explain?

[wildeyed]

13. I would love to get IRV or something similar.

It would bring third parties into the discussion and force more civility and compromise between the parties. This two party system is a big part of the problem these days.

Right now I would be happy to get same-day voter registration in my state. It is a good intermediate step to these other reforms, and there is some hope of getting it passed in the near future.

[Idioteque]

14. Proportional Representation yes .... IRV... No Thanks

IRV is a looks good on paper. Our current first past the post system is broken but IRV will just make it worse. It can actually encourage tactical voting even more than the current system.

Why IRV is flawed.

Instead, I think we should use Condorcet or Approval voting.

I'm not trying to flame here or anything. The system must be changed. I used to support IRV but Condorcet looks much, much better.

[redqueen]

15. Thanks for this info. n/t

[morgan2]

16. this is something

that both the left and right agree upon, the only one holding it back is the politicians, and those who are ignorant of the political process and like to think everything is just fine.

[cestpaspossible]

17. My better idea.

Just make sure the votes are properly counted, and expand the House so it is more inline with the Representative chamber envisioned by the founders.

[booley]

18. Bt then..

we may always have a problem of one parety finding a way to grab power by appealing to a small and easily manipulated minority.

[booley]

19. kick!

want more votes in poll!!

Don't be shy