[EM] Answers regarding claim about Approval's enact-ability
rbj at audioimagination.com
Mon Apr 16 19:01:05 PDT 2012
On 4/16/12 8:25 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
> 2012/4/16 Richard Fobes <ElectionMethods at votefair.org
> <mailto:ElectionMethods at votefair.org>>
> On 4/16/2012 12:50 PM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
> On 4/16/12 12:42 PM, Richard Fobes wrote:
> As I recall the issue is that I stated in a previous
> message that
> Approval voting was very unlikely to be adopted for use in
> Presidential _general_ elections. Here are some reasons:
> 1: Making that change requires adopting a Constitutional
> not precisely. there is a going state compact movement that will
> essentially make the Electoral College a figurehead. it will
> exist, but
> it will be powerless. and it doesn't need a Constitutional
> because the Constitution says that the state legislatures have the
> exclusive authority in defining how the presidential electors are
> chosen. ...
> > ...
> Notice that the "state compact movement" specifies that the
> state's electoral votes goes to the candidate with the "most votes."
> Yes, the current compact which has been adopted by several states is
> to use a nationwide plurality vote. However, a compact to use approval
> voting could, in theory, be adopted by those same states, and the
> wording could be such that the approval contact supercedes the
> plurality one as soon as states representing enough electoral votes
> sign onto the approval one.
but how do the states adopting the compact know who the true Approval
winner is when state who haven't adopted the compact do not supply the
full approval data, since voting for more than one spoils their
ballots? would it just accept those numbers as single approvals on
r b-j rbj at audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
More information about the Election-Methods