[EM] another Condorcet/IRV politics question

James Green-Armytage jarmyta at antioch-college.edu
Mon May 2 05:32:07 PDT 2005

Mike, you wrote:
>Condorcetists and Approvalists can and 
>will sink IRV anywhere where they have the opportunity and the time to
>the people what IRV is like.
>Really, we should have an organization dedicated to finding out about
>IRV proposal in the U.S., or anywhere, and taking turns writing to the 
>decisionmakers involved in the choice, or getting our information
>in newspaper letters or ballot-pamphlets there, attending forums, etc. We 
>could fairly divide the time and labor of doing that work. I can't do it 

	Rather than spending your effort just on opposing IRV, as long as you're
getting organized and active, why not propose WV as a counterproposal
wherever IRV is being proposed? 
	Or better yet, why not just spend your organizing effort proposing WV in
some district where you think that it is winnable, whether IRV is being
proposed there or not?
	If IRV is used in some places, and WV is used in others, and approval is
used in some others... and there is evidence that WV and/or approval is
having more of a positive impact than IRV, don't you think that this would
be the best argument in favor of WV or approval, better than any argument
we can make based on theory alone?
	In the US, different areas have a lot of independence in choosing their
voting systems. I don't see why different areas shouldn't try different
methods. Hence, at this time when most places still use plurality and
runoffs, the interaction between IRV and Condorcet isn't zero sum. (Less
IRV implementation doesn't necessarily mean more Condorcet implementation,
and vice versa.)
	In short, if your goal is WV implementation, I think that you should
focus on WV implementation, rather than IRV opposition. Same if your goal
is approval implementation or CR implementation.


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list