[EM] Jameson: How will voting system reform happen?

[Michael Ossipoff]

2013/1/14 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
>
> IRV will be the next voting system, and that's very much ok.
>
>
Michael's statement above is based on the idea that voting reform will
happen through a third party gaining majority power. I believe that this
is, frankly, a pipe dream.

[endquote]

Jameson thinks that the Democrat-Republican two-party system
represents the will of the people.

I've addressed that matter previously, and if Jameson still holds that
belief, it would be pointless to say any more to him about it.


Jameson says:

Third parties can and should have local
victories, and I applaud and support the efforts to organize for that to
happen. But national or statewide majorities will not happen before voting
reform.

[endquote]

...unless Jameson and others like him finally decide to vote for what
they want, instead of what their tv tells them is winnable.

Sure, wouldn't it be nice to have a better voting system first?  :-)
Dream on, Jameson.

No one's doing state initiatives. As I said, they're prohibitively
expensive and difficult.

Jameson thinks that Republican and Democrat politicians are going to
enact the very voting system reforms that Jameson implies could
replace them with "3rd parties". Did someone say something about pipe
drams?  :-)

Maybe it could happen in La-La Land, but if that's Jameson's scenario
for how voting-system reform will happen, then it's fantasy fiction.

The media go to a lot of trouble to systematically exclude mention of
anything other than Democrats and Republicans. Some people think that
NPR is progressive, but NPR never mentions anyone other than Democrats
and Republicans, or any policy-proposals other than theirs.

For those media to mention Approval voting, or for those politicians
to advocate or enact it would be contrary to the interest for which
they've always worked so consistently.

Pipe dream? Sure.

Jameson says:

I believe that there are coherent reasons for major-party
politicians to support voting reform

[endquote[

...but Jameson seemingly has forgotten to tell us what those reasons are :-)

Jameson says:

 But if voting reform were passed by existing major parties,
IRV's strengths (ie, MMC) would be mostly irrelevant, and its weaknesses
(FBC) would tend to entrench the two-party system and undercut the chances
for further reform on this and other structural issues (such as campaign
finance). .

[endquote]

Jameson, how many times have I said that I DON'T advocate IRV for our
current electorate (given its current media-promoted beliefs, its
willingness to believe whatever the tv says).?


Jameson says:

Thus, I find IRV to be a dangerous distraction, and reiterate the
call for us to unite our public activism around Approval.

[endquote]

I agree completely with Jameson that, for our current electorate, with
its current beliefs, Approval is the method that we should propose,
for various reasons. The main thing that makes Approval a good
proposal is its FBC-compliance. Right now, given the current
electorate's media-obedience and their resulting beliefs, FBC is
essential. We agree on that.

But it ain't gonna happen, Jameson. Jameson told us how he expects it
to happen. The Democrats and Republicans, he says, are going to enact
Approval, because we ask them to :-)

We can't afford a state initiative, but guess what, there are
elections that don't cost most of us anything. What would you have to
do, to do your part for change? Well, you could mark a  name on a
ballot. If enough people are willing to also do so, then the results
will happen immediately. But if people won't even do that, then I
doubt that you'll hear them clamoring for voting-system reform.

Mike Ossipoff















(As for Bruce's objections to Approval: Bruce, I'm willing to go another
few rounds with you in private trying to find common ground on this
question, if you're game. I think a two-way conversation on this issue is
significantly more likely to be fruitful than a free-for-all.)

Jameson