On 1/5/2013 8:12 AM, Jonathan Denn wrote:
> .... The purpose is to draft a Constitutional Amendment for omnibus
> electoral reform. For these people everything is on the table. We had
> to pass on another household name because that person wouldn't put
> Term Limits on the table.
(...adding to what I wrote earlier)
Term limits are perceived as "needed" because elections aren't working.
If elections did produce fair results, elections would be the best way
to limit the term of an incumbent politician.
Instead of dismissing the person who doesn't want term limits "on the
table," I'd suggest clarifying (in your reform) that term limits are a
backup plan in case primary elections are not reformed (to be truly
competitive).
Many Republicans think that Democratic voters are happy with the
Democrats who win Democratic primaries, and many Democrats think that
Republican voters are happy with the Republicans who win Republican
elections. I talk to people in both political parties, and I can assure
you that a majority of voters in each party are not happy with their
party's candidates (except as being better than the ones in the "other"
party). This discontent is clear evidence of unfair _primary_ elections.
I appreciate that your group recognizes that _primary_ elections is
where the biggest unfairnesses occur, and the term-limit issue
underscores the unfairness.
Here's wishing you good luck with your reform efforts.
Richard Fobes
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
