Hi Russ,
I don't know the details of the Washington State situation, so please correct me if I've misunderstood the new rule. As far as I can tell, the changes that we are talking about essentially create a two round runoff instead of a plurality election... except that the second round is mandatory even if a candidate receives a majority in the first round.
I agree.
I don't really buy the argument that third parties are excluded by this
system. If they want to win, they need to compete with the Dems and Reps
in the primary. If they can get the votes there, they have a real chance
of being elected in the general election. Compare that to a plurality
system where even popular third party candidates have a very hard time
convincing voters that they should be considered viable and hence that
they should be voted for in the general election. Winning a spot in the
runoff guarantees that they will be given a fair shot at the office.
I also don't buy the 'unconstitutionally preventing parties from
choosing
their own candidates' argument. That has more to do with regulating the
use of party names on ballots than it has to do with the voting system
itself. Basically, I think that in a two round runoff system, the parties
should be free to hold their own primaries before the first round. Then,
party members can commit to vote in the first round for whoever wins their
primary.
I agree again. Hey, we're on a roll here. The key issue, of course, is whether or not the parties will be allowed to hold their own private primaries before the so-called "primary," which is really the first round of the two-round general election. If they are allowed that, then the system is at least reasonably fair, but then the second round will strongly tend to exclude third parties (for the same reason that third parties are uncompetitive now).
On the other hand, if the private primaries are *not* allowed, then chaos will ensue. In that case, each party's chances will depend heavily on how many candidates happen to run under their banner. If I were a shady operator, I would recruit and/or support candidates for the party I oppose just to split their vote. (Remember the Republicans who provided financial support for Nader last time around? No, he wasn't a Democrat, but he threatened to take votes from them.)
--Russ ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
