[EM] action?

[Alex Small]

I received a few "thumbs up" on my suggestions for action, so I put these
questions out:

1)  How many people will participate in a $2002 for 2002 fund-raiser?  We
can all nominate candidates around the country who are making AV or other
worthwhile election reforms a top priority.  We'll hold an election on
the list by Approval Voting, to decide which candidate we'll raise funds
for and what the fund-raising target will be.  All of this is obviously
voluntary.  Once a candidate and target is selected people can make non-
binding pledges.  If the goal is reached we'll collect the money.

I nominate Paul Hager (www.hager2002.org), Libertarian for Sec. of State
in Indiana.  I suggest a goal of $2002, and I will pledge $50 to the
effort.  I am of course open to other nominations.

Any takers?

2)  If anybody wants to collaborate on a serious proposal to be sent to
major third parties I'm game.  My basic idea is this:

The parties agree on some target states where they agree not to compete
in elections for the lower house of the legislature (small districts,
easier to win with pooled resources) and also Sec. of State races, and
they all agree to endorse Approval Voting.  If 2 parties join then in
half of the districts one party runs a candidate, and in the other half
the other party runs a candidate.  They also agree to use their resources
to persuade their members to support candidates of the other party for
the purposes of election reform.  Aside from their common stake in
election reform, electing somebody from ANY third party helps cure the
"wasted vote syndrome", benefiting them in future races.

We could see if Brams and Fishburn would give their endorsement to it,
since they literally wrote the book on Approval Voting, and signatures of
tenured professors and Ph.D's will look more impressive.  Maybe even Saari
would support this, if he agrees that Approval is superior to Plurality and
IRV (although obviously he thinks Borda is superior to all of those).

Alex Small