top | item 44893412

(no title)

ninthcat | 6 months ago

I don't think national elections need to have districts smaller than a state at all. If all of a state's seats in the House that are up for election were decided in a single state-wide election with multiple winners allocated with proportional representation, it is impossible to gerrymander. Many other countries have this kind of system.

discuss

order

andrewla|6 months ago

In the US there is pretty fierce opposition to the idea of giving political parties any legal status. In the US they are private companies that help candidates satisfy the legal requirements for candidacy (which are party agnostic) and politicians are voluntary members that can pool resources and engage in voluntary collective activities on behalf of their party. But the party itself has no real standing. [1]

There are a variety of systems for doing proportional representation with parties, but the preference in the US has been to vote for people, not for parties. When I vote for my local candidate, I'm not voting for the local party bigwigs to decide who will be my representative in cigar-smoke filled back rooms whilst sipping brandy and complaining about the poors.

Maybe this is a hopeless dream as more and more politics shifts to the national level, but I still like the idea of it.

[1] There are some exceptions to this procedurally; there are majority/minority systems in various legislatures. And in presidential elections the nature of electors is kind of strange about this.

ninthcat|6 months ago

It's possible to do proportional representation with a ranked choice voting system where you vote for individuals rather than parties. Or you could allow voters to rank either parties or individual candidates based on their preference; an example of this is the Australian Senate election.