Tilting at the Ballot Box

[Steve Schear]

At 10:10 AM 8/31/2004, Justin wrote:

>On 2004-08-30T17:40:25-0700, Steve Schear wrote:
> > At 05:23 AM 8/30/2004, Justin wrote:
> > >Are States "geopolitical distortions" as well?  Are countries?
> > >
> > >If you're going to propose an alternate system, please clearly identify
> > >1) the voting pool, and 2) what they're voting for.  If the pool is
> > >voting for a party instead of individuals, how does a winning party pick
> > >representatives?  Is that selection method fair?
> >
> > While this is certainly a value judgement, almost every other nation 
> thinks
> > so.
>
>Even if we used it here, the fate of legislation would still be
>determined by the dominant party in the Senate, which would still rarely
>if ever admit 3rd parties, and by the president's veto.

While I agree that at, least initially, the Senate would continue be 
populated only by Republicrats, this could eventually change if minority 
parties gain a good enough foothold in the House.  Both major parties 
contain major 'single issue' blocks (e.g., the Republican Party's fiscal 
conservatives and Christian fundamentalists) are only sometimes satisfied 
with the platforms and conduct of the major parties.  These voters now have 
no alternatives, but if they thought they could have more legislative 
muscle through minority party seats they could well abandon the majors.


>I assume you're criticizing only House election procedures because
>that's the only thing that can be attacked without completely
>restructuring the federal legislature.  If it were possible, would you
>prefer to see nation-wide proportional representation if it included
>mandatory geographical distribution requirements like those you
>described?

Yes.

steve