[EM] Re: IRV letter

[Forest Simmons]

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Ken Taylor wrote:

>
> > Why not pit all the best methods head to head against Plurality, and then
> > adopt the method that beats Plurality by the greatest number of votes (if
> > plurality isn't the CW).
> >
> > Wouldn't that be a more democratic way of deciding the voting method than
> > having a committee of unelected nincompoops decide what the single
> > alternative is going to be?
> >
>
> This is a very strange way to spin this. Since when should you have to be
> "elected" to get an initiative on the ballot? Since when should a group
> who's pushing for such an initiative be required to also put initiatives on
> for alternate positions that they don't agree with?
>
> Once an initiative is accepted, then the voters at large can
> *democratically* decide whether or not to implement it. If you disagree,
> don't vote for it, and perhaps organize to get your own initiative passed.

True, the initiative process is loaded with procedural democracy.  I'm more
concerned about the (miserly) substantive democracy of the IRV initiatives.
Note that both your comments and mine would still be true if the CVD
initiative were to install Bush as "Fearless Leader for Life."

It strikes me as ironic (if not hypocritical) that they are working so
hard to limit the choices, while pressing as urgent the adoption of a
method that can address more than two alternatives (so that we can cope
with the diverse choices needed for real democracy?).

Your comments and mine would both apply to the Presidential Debate
Commission as well.  A group of non-elected nincompoops can exclude
whomsoever they please from their debates.


Unelected private commissions (like the CVD and the Presidential Debate
Commission) with power and resources still have a moral obligation to act
in the public interest, and are not exempt from criticism by citizens
(like you and me).

I do criticize the CVD and Presidential Debate Commission for lack of
substantive democratic spirit, and I have proposed more democratic
alternatives.

To say that Ralph Nader should quit complaining and start his own
presidential debate commission or that I should start my own organization
to achieve what my taxes and elected officials are supposed to be doing
reminds me of our millionaire mayor lecturing the homeless for sleeping
under the bridge: says she (in effect) "I obey the anti-camping ordinance,
so why can't you?"


Forest

>
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
>