Australia has a system based on that of the US (single-member constituencies in House of Reps, and equal state representation in the Senate ). But we have ranked-choice (or instant runoff) in the Reps, and PR in the Senate. This has long meant that voters can support a third party without "wasting their vote". More recently, we have seen the two-party system to break down, as more small-party and independent candidates outpoll at least one of the traditional big parties and are then elected in subsequent rounds of counting.
Even without PR, a shift to ranked-choice would be hugely beneficial. It only requires a change in the voting method, not a wholesale reconstruction of the electoral system
Hi John, thanks for sharing that info. I have been following the "independent candidate" movement in Australia with great interest, especially as women have been playing a prominent role. I previously wrote about it on DemocracySOS, here's a link https://democracysos.substack.com/p/australian-women-lead-a-revolution
Thanks for the update on this important dynamic, and your thoughts about reform.
Certainly something to dream about. Not sure how legislation, even well-written would survive this Supreme Court and you can bet that’s exactly where such legislation would end up. If we’ve learned anything it’s that power doesn’t just surrender itself willingly.
Thanks for your thoughts. Though the types of remedies I wrote about are already in use in the US, and the US Supreme Court has not stopped them. In fact, the California Supreme Court in its Pico decision last August names proportional ranked choice voting as a legitimate and even preferable method in certain voting rights situations, in which racial minority voters are too geographically dispersed to benefit from drawing districts. I'm not worried about the Sup Crt, they aren't going to stop this. It's self-interested politicians who are the biggest obstruction, many of whom only think about these matters in terms of how it will benefit them personally and their party.
Good to know. I had no idea that ranked choice would be in the equation as a solution but now that you mention it, I can see how that would work. I still think though that legislation is certain districts would be challenged. Whether or not they would be successful, is a different matter. We know that voting rights are being stripped in a number of areas just as abortion is. It seems to be irrelevant whether or not the lawsuit is successful but it is useful to confuse and create insidious side issues. And yes, it’s all about self interest in gaining or maintaining power. A great step would be to either get rid of the electoral college(not likely)or having enough state’s delegates go to the winner of the election in that state. That effort seems to be well underway.
Have you heard of the National Popular Vote reform? It has made significant progress in creating a national vote for president. It turns out that you don't need to pass a constitutional amendment. The way it works is that individual states decide to engage in an interstate compact – kind of like a treaty between the states – in which each state agrees to give its electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Once enough states have signed onto this compact that collectively have 270 electoral votes (the number a candidate needs to win the presidency), at that point the compact goes into effect. It has been enacted into law by 17 states and DC with 209 electoral votes, which is 77% of the votes needed to reach 270. It only needs an additional 61 electoral votes to go into effect, and -- voila! -- we will have a national popular vote for president. Check it out at https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/. They need more activists and donations, so spread the word.
We could just start a brand new, modern, sophisticated system and run it in parallel to the archaic, corrupt, *pathetic* official one. Would be a good way to demonstrate a point, and it would be funny to watch the propaganda ensue (which could be predicted in advance, making it even funnier).
No one on this planet seems to have any sense of adventure or humor anymore. :(
Interesting to think about. But how would it actually work in practice? The US has 330 million people with about 160 million registered voters across 50 states and the District of Columbia. Any thoughts on how to make a "causal loop" work in this situation? All the best
The point of drawing the diagram at this stage is to reveal how monstrous and complex the problem is we're dealing with so we're not running on pure heuristics.
Another benefit is that sometimes once a system realizes it is being observed, it changes.😉
Australia has a system based on that of the US (single-member constituencies in House of Reps, and equal state representation in the Senate ). But we have ranked-choice (or instant runoff) in the Reps, and PR in the Senate. This has long meant that voters can support a third party without "wasting their vote". More recently, we have seen the two-party system to break down, as more small-party and independent candidates outpoll at least one of the traditional big parties and are then elected in subsequent rounds of counting.
Even without PR, a shift to ranked-choice would be hugely beneficial. It only requires a change in the voting method, not a wholesale reconstruction of the electoral system
Hi John, thanks for sharing that info. I have been following the "independent candidate" movement in Australia with great interest, especially as women have been playing a prominent role. I previously wrote about it on DemocracySOS, here's a link https://democracysos.substack.com/p/australian-women-lead-a-revolution
Thanks for the update on this important dynamic, and your thoughts about reform.
What the US and the rest need is the swiss political system, real democracy, study it. TheSwissPoliticalSystem.com
Open primary elections would help nudge the representative toward the median voter's views.
Certainly something to dream about. Not sure how legislation, even well-written would survive this Supreme Court and you can bet that’s exactly where such legislation would end up. If we’ve learned anything it’s that power doesn’t just surrender itself willingly.
Thanks for your thoughts. Though the types of remedies I wrote about are already in use in the US, and the US Supreme Court has not stopped them. In fact, the California Supreme Court in its Pico decision last August names proportional ranked choice voting as a legitimate and even preferable method in certain voting rights situations, in which racial minority voters are too geographically dispersed to benefit from drawing districts. I'm not worried about the Sup Crt, they aren't going to stop this. It's self-interested politicians who are the biggest obstruction, many of whom only think about these matters in terms of how it will benefit them personally and their party.
Good to know. I had no idea that ranked choice would be in the equation as a solution but now that you mention it, I can see how that would work. I still think though that legislation is certain districts would be challenged. Whether or not they would be successful, is a different matter. We know that voting rights are being stripped in a number of areas just as abortion is. It seems to be irrelevant whether or not the lawsuit is successful but it is useful to confuse and create insidious side issues. And yes, it’s all about self interest in gaining or maintaining power. A great step would be to either get rid of the electoral college(not likely)or having enough state’s delegates go to the winner of the election in that state. That effort seems to be well underway.
Have you heard of the National Popular Vote reform? It has made significant progress in creating a national vote for president. It turns out that you don't need to pass a constitutional amendment. The way it works is that individual states decide to engage in an interstate compact – kind of like a treaty between the states – in which each state agrees to give its electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Once enough states have signed onto this compact that collectively have 270 electoral votes (the number a candidate needs to win the presidency), at that point the compact goes into effect. It has been enacted into law by 17 states and DC with 209 electoral votes, which is 77% of the votes needed to reach 270. It only needs an additional 61 electoral votes to go into effect, and -- voila! -- we will have a national popular vote for president. Check it out at https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/. They need more activists and donations, so spread the word.
We could just start a brand new, modern, sophisticated system and run it in parallel to the archaic, corrupt, *pathetic* official one. Would be a good way to demonstrate a point, and it would be funny to watch the propaganda ensue (which could be predicted in advance, making it even funnier).
No one on this planet seems to have any sense of adventure or humor anymore. :(
It's a good idea, and a good start on it!
For the remedies section, may I suggest one of these:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_loop_diagram
Interesting to think about. But how would it actually work in practice? The US has 330 million people with about 160 million registered voters across 50 states and the District of Columbia. Any thoughts on how to make a "causal loop" work in this situation? All the best
That's the trickiest part!
The point of drawing the diagram at this stage is to reveal how monstrous and complex the problem is we're dealing with so we're not running on pure heuristics.
Another benefit is that sometimes once a system realizes it is being observed, it changes.😉
Yeah. That was what I was referring to but couldn’t think of the name of it. Senioritis has kicked in.