I look at this and shake my head. I am not used to parties having the
kind of control implied here - let alone evil control. But the evil
control could exist in other states.
Then I look at what has been written in our declaration. I see
nothing for:
. Who can be a voter - most any adult.
. Who can be a candidate - most any voter.
. What about primary elections? Nothing said inconsistent with
voters joining a party, seeing to candidates for primaries and voting
in primaries.
Why do we have primaries? With FPTP, multiple candidates from a party
in the main election could be a disaster. If parties had the power
some imply, they could attend to this by preventing multiple party
candidates from being in the main election.
We talk of proportional-representation, that could involve party
control - but I do not remember the Declaration getting into that yet.
Via http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menuf.cgi I looked up NY
election law (ELN). It gets deeply involved in voters nominating
candidates by petition - voters who do not spend all their time at
this complex task - but nothing glaring about party control.
Dave Ketchum
On Sep 3, 2011, at 1:38 PM, Richard Fobes wrote:
To: Fred Gohlke
I agree that our Declaration only reduces, and does not completely
eliminate, control of politics by political parties and political-
party leaders. Yet, as you have pointed out in other messages, we
need to take one step at a time.
After we have disseminated this Declaration we can move on to
attempting to find some kind of consensus for proportional-
representation methods, and then write and disseminate a separate
Declaration on that topic, and that PR-based Declaration (if
followed) will further reduce control by political-party leaders
(and their followers). Then, presumably years from now, we can move
on to developing, and reaching consensus about, voting methods that
fully bypass party politics.
As you have correctly pointed out, we need to take one step at a time.
Richard Fobes
On 9/2/2011 1:25 PM, Fred Gohlke wrote:
Good Afternoon, Mr. Fobes
re: "I think that the listed benefits (of election-method reform)
cover most of your "participation" principle ..."
The declaration presumes the right of political parties to select the
candidates for public office, thereby preventing meaningful
participation by the public.
Over two hundred years experience with party politics (should) have
taught us that political parties transcend the will of the people.
Parties are important for the principals: the party leaders,
contributors, candidates and elected officials, but the significance
diminishes rapidly as the distance from the center of power grows.
Most
people are on the periphery, remote from the center of power. As
outsiders, they have little incentive to participate in the political
process. The flaws in party politics are disastrous and we ought not
blind ourselves to the political causes of the devastation we're
enduring, right now.
If the only purpose of the declaration is to break the hold of
plurality
it may be effective, but it offers no roadmap for those countries
seeking an electoral method that gives their people meaningful
participation in the political process.
Fred Gohlke
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
