Display:
A lot of this discussion makes sense for most countries, but not for the U.S, where elections are on  the state level. If a state introduces IRV, you may have different winners for different states, and then what? Changing the election system to a Federal will be a lot harder.
by gk (g k quattro due due sette "at" gmail.com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 07:22:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You could introduce this system for all kinds of elections from city council to state legislatures to congressional delegations.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 07:25:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Definitely. But the talk upthread about caucases suggested that the Presidential election was in mind. It might be interesting (though completely unrealistic) to think about each state voting for a ranking of candidates using IRV, and then have the Electoral College combine the votes also using IRV....
by gk (g k quattro due due sette "at" gmail.com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 08:50:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Per comment above, take IRV in steps. Many states have initiative processes nowadays; there is no federal-level mechanism. This is the obvious route for change of voting laws and would easily pass in many states.

Beyond that, the presidency is the least vulnerable institution, when it comes to abrogating ruling-class control. Start where the population can actually affect something.

paul spencer

by paul spencer (spencerinthegorge AT yahoo DOT com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 01:57:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series