[EM] Democratic Electoral Methods
jms346 at georgetown.edu
Tue Jan 10 10:49:57 PST 2017
STV with nomination by petition is anything but a party-based system. Yet I
find that party organization helps explain even the adoption of that
(supposedly) party-weakening voting rule.
I have little to add to a normative debate about the place of parties in
democracy. I am somewhat familiar with what it takes to win an election
reform. This paper by Jack Nagel is pretty good:
Ph.D. Candidate in Government
202-681-5225 (Google Voice)
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Fred Gohlke <fredgohlke at verizon.net> wrote:
> Good Morning, Jack
> The difficulty arises because partisanship is a vital part of society.
> Unfortunately, it's a double-edged sword. On the good side, it is at the
> heart of all progress; on the not-so-good side, it provides a natural
> platform for power-seekers.
> The big problem, in politics, is that party-based systems do not let the
> mellowing voice of non-partisans temper their excesses. Instead,
> non-partisans are disenfranchised. Pew Research, for example, constantly
> refers to 'leaners', people who vote with a party but are not members.
> What should stand out, but doesn't, is that leaners lean because they have
> no other choice. They are forced to choose the (for them) lesser of two
> Sennet Williams asked, "What is the goal of a 'better' election method?"
> and answered himself by saying, "Personally, I want 'better govt.'"
> I suggest that, if we want better government, we should start by
> recognizing that our government cannot be better than the people we elect
> to provide it. If we are dissatisfied with our government, the first step
> in improving it is to elect better people. That cannot happen as long as
> political parties are allowed to select the candidates for public office
> because "Those who control the options, control the outcome."
> When thinking about better election methods, the biggest issue is not how
> the votes are counted, it is who the people can vote for. If we want
> better candidates, we must change the way they are selected. As Jane
> Mansbridge told us in "A 'Selection Model' of Political Representation":
> "Another possible --- and sometimes conflicting -- approach is
> based primarily on selection. This approach works only when
> the principal and agent would have similar objectives even in
> the absence of specific incentives and sanctions. That is,
> the agent is already internally motivated to pursue certain
> goals -- goals that in politics include both a general
> political direction and specific policies. If the
> representative's desired direction and policies are the ones
> the constituent desires, and if the representative also has a
> verifiable reputation of being both competent and honest, then
> it makes sense for a constituent to put that representative in
> office and subsequently spend relatively little effort on
> monitoring and sanctioning. As a general rule, the higher the
> probability that the objectives of principal and agent may be
> aligned, the more efficient it is for the principal to invest
> resources ex ante, in selecting the required type, rather than
> ex post, in monitoring and sanctioning."
> Consideration of electoral methods should include thought about ways to
> select candidates whose goals are in line with the public interest. Instead
> of letting political parties tell us who we can vote for, we need a method
> that integrates the goals of partisans and non-partisans. It's not
> difficult, it's just different.
> Fred Gohlke
>  https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/workingpapers/
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Election-Methods