[EM] Electoral Experimentation

[Richard Fobes]

On 12/15/2011 12:15 PM, David L Wetzell wrote:
 > dlw: Within the third parties themselves, there'd need to be used
 > single-winner elections to determine their candidates/leaders/positions.
 >   In these regards, there'd be great scope for experimentation with
 > single-winner election rules, especially since they'd have no commitment
 > to a particular single-winner election rule.

You said that experimentation opportunities would be
"a good reason to strategically support IRV".
Presumably IRV would be used for both internal voting
"to determine their candidates/leaders/positions"
and for choosing candidates for public elections.

Why would IRV-chosen party leaders be motivated to try
any other voting method (for either internal or
candidate-selection use)?

Richard Fobes


On 12/15/2011 12:15 PM, David L Wetzell wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Richard Fobes <ElectionMethods at VoteFair.org>
> To: election-methods at electorama.com <mailto:election-methods at electorama.com>
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 23:26:59 -0800
> Subject: [EM] Electoral experimentation
> On 12/14/2011 12:59 PM, David L Wetzell wrote:
>
>     if we push hard for the use of American Proportional Representation
>     it'll give third parties a better chance to win seats and they will
>     prove great labs for experimentation with electoral reform.
>
>     This is also a good reason to strategically support IRV, since we can
>     trust that with changes, there'll be more scope for experimentation and
>     consideration of multiple alternatives to FPTP.
>
>     dlw
>
>
> I doubt that electoral experimentation would follow the adoption of any
> new election method.
>
> Why?  Consider that elected representatives tend to defend whatever
> election method they got elected under.  So if "American Proportional
> Representation" -- or any other method -- were used by a third party to
> elect its leaders, the elected representatives would be unlikely to
> support experimenting with other election methods.
>
> dlw: Within the third parties themselves, there'd need to be used
> single-winner elections to determine their candidates/leaders/positions.
>   In these regards, there'd be great scope for experimentation with
> single-winner election rules, especially since they'd have no commitment
> to a particular single-winner election rule.
>
> It's analogous to a door to a treasure room that gets closed and locked
> after the first people pass through.  People who gain access to power
> naturally want to preserve whatever electoral system got them elected.
>
> dlw: Third parties (in a 2 party dominated system) aren't so much about
> getting into power as making democracy work, turning over the center....
>
> Richard Fobes
>
>
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info