LAT: "Instant runoff' voting touted

'Instant runoff' voting touted

Oakland will use such a system. Davis, Calif., has opted for 'proportional representation.' Backers believe the systems make races more competitive.
By Nancy Vogel
Times Staff Writer

December 25, 2006

SACRAMENTO — Americans have been picking politicians the same way for so long — winner take all — that it might seem there is no other way to do it. But the cities of Davis, Calif.; Oakland and Minneapolis, as well as Pierce County, Wash.; have passed ballot measures that will lead to "instant runoff" or "proportional representation" voting in city and county elections. There was no organized opposition to the measures.

(snip)

Proportional voting involves races in which several people are elected to a board, council or legislature from a single geographic area or district. It does not apply to races for a single office, such as mayor or district attorney. In a city council race in which, for example, 10 people are vying for five at-large seats, voters would rank the candidates in their order of preference. When a candidate is the top choice of enough voters to clinch election, any excess votes for that candidate are redistributed to those voters' second choice. The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and those ballots are reassigned to the voters' next-in-line choice. The process continues until five winners emerge.

(snip)

Supporters say the system has the potential to help elect independent, third-party and more moderate Republican and Democratic candidates — something Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and many political reformers say California needs in its polarized Legislature. Schwarzenegger vowed this month to take away lawmakers' power to draw their own districts and give it to an independent commission so that legislative races become more competitive.

(snip)

Critics say proportional voting is too complicated and not the American way. The California Republican Party hasn't taken an official stance on different voting methods, said spokesman Patrick Dorinson. Bob Mulholland, political director for the California Democratic Party, said cities and counties ought to be free to choose whatever voting system they like. But he called the notion of using proportional representation for legislative or congressional seats "cockamamie" and "contradictory to a democratic system."

"The Democratic Party wants to help the middle class and working poor, and the way we do it is by being in office," Mulholland said, "and that damned idea would only hurt that, because people with little following would start being elected." Mulholland also said the system would confuse voters, in the ballot box and afterward.

(snip)


http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-voting25dec25,1,404720.story?coll=la-headlines-california

I'm not really in favor of a completely proportional, party-list system, but I do think that expanding the U.S. House of Reps to about 600 or so and dividing the country into districts with 3 to 5 members (in states where applicable) elected by the single-transferable vote would really enhance things. It would become far harder to gerrymander districts, would allow more women and minorities to be elected to government, would allow moderates, liberals, and conservatives to be elected, and would make the House far more responsive to changes in the national mood. Also, third parties would have a genuine chance at winning.

They are two different things, except that people interested in fairness generally favor both. As long as proportional representation is applied to municipalities dominated by Democrats, the Republicans of course won't object because it will give them more representation.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Instant Runoff Voting is the only issue I've ever worked with Green's and Democrats on, and found them to be in total lockstep. It would end the era of subpar, 'stand for nothing but the death penalty and the deliciousness ofapple pie and freedom' Democrats slinking through one general after another because of fear of some war criminal in training riding to victory on the back of a split Green/Dem vote.

An era of understanding the likes of which we'd never seen would appear, and our slightly furrier Green friends could sit at the table with us in peace (if we agreed to a Vegan menu and a nonstop playlist of Michael Franti), and Al From would descend back into his crypt far beneath Washington, never to trouble the living again.