|
|
| (21 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | '''Background:''' Democracy refers as much to a lively political culture as to a system of government. A diverse society needs a pluralistic structure to allow the widest possible range of people to have their voices heard. To truly enfranchise citizens, we must ensure that everyone has their say.
| + | Democracy refers as much to a lively political culture as to a system of government. A diverse society needs a pluralistic structure to allow the widest possible range of views to heard. To truly enfranchise citizens, everyone must have the right and the ability to their say. |
| | | | |
| − | The answer is a different system, where all voters can cast a vote towards actually electing someone who represents their views — and where as many parties have a real chance at winning seats, as represent the full electorate — a system of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for legislative elections, and ranked choice voting for single-seat executive office. To promote government for all, we need to ensure everyone has a seat at the table of our democracy. What’s happening to smaller parties is a canary in the coal mine. The current system is incapable of representing our diversity. Something more inclusive needs to take its place. | + | The United States has one of the lowest voter turnouts among established democracies. In a healthy democracy, high voter turnout results from the ability of voters to cast votes to elect candidates who reflect their views. By contrast, the U.S. single-seat, winner-take-all electoral system greatly limits voter choice and representation -- a disincentive to vote -- especially when combined with campaign finance laws that give disproportionate influence to big money. Many who do vote, go to the polls primarily to vote for what they are against. California's failed top two experiment has only made this worse, limiting voters to only two choices in the general election, and making primary ballot access more difficult. This reduction in choice has led to historically low voter turnout. When few eligible voters participate and elect our representatives, the legitimacy and representative nature of our democracy is diminished. |
| | | | |
| − | Voter turnout. Voters will turn out in direct proportion to the degree that they believe their vote will count.
| + | Much electoral reform debate focuses upon who should draw districts lines, and how to make district elections competitive. But competitive districts don't mean representative elections, and single-seat, winner-take-all district elections are not capable of representing the diversity of California voters. |
| | | | |
| − | The United States has some of the lowest voter turnout. This is because the U.S. single-seat
| + | Greens support the use of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for the state legislature, and ranked-choice voting for statewide executive office. Greens also support a larger legislature, which will allow for results to be more proportional. |
| | | | |
| − | In California this is made even worse by the large size. California has the lowest per-capita represenation in the nited States.
| + | California currently has by far the lowest per-capita state representation in the United States (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_U.S._state_governments). The number of seats in the California state legislature was set in 1879 when California's statewide population was approximately 865,000 (http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/state_census_data_center/historical_census_1850-2010/documents/2010-1850_STCO_IncCities-FINAL.xls). Today that many people live within a single State Senate District and are represented by a single State Senator, and the state population is over 39 million -- yet the number of seats has never been increased (as of 2016 http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-1/documents/E-1_2016PressRelease.pdf). |
| | | | |
| − | The result is low turnout, and when voting, voting for what they don't want intead | + | '''Proposals:''' The Green Party proposes: |
| | | | |
| − | California large districts. The number of seats set when California had a population of how many. As of 2016, it was at how many million.
| + | '''Voting Systems''' |
| | | | |
| − | Top Two played upon this, but made it worse. fewer choices.
| + | - Enact a system of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for the California state legislature, and ranked choice voting for single-seat executive office. (www.cagreens.org/platform/proportional-representation |
| | | | |
| − | - The average turnout of eligible voters in Presidential election years is about 53%, and in non-Presidential elections years about 43%. (THIS NEEDS CITATION, ISN"T CLEAR WHETHER STATE OR FEDERAL, AND FOR WHAT KIND OF RACES) This means, in a two-way, winner-take-all race, the winning candidate for a state-level office needs only an average of about 27% of the eligible voters to win (53% x 50.1%) in a Presidential election year, and only about 22% (43% x 50.1%) in a non-Presidential election year. (ALL OF THIS IS TOO SPECIFIC ON NUMBERS. SHOULD BE REWRITTEN TO MAKE THESE POINTS MORE GENERALLY). It is difficult to believe that elections where so few participate or vote for winning candidates can be considered legitimate or representative.
| + | - Increase the number of seats in the state legislature. |
| | | | |
| − | Turnout has gotten even worse under Top Two.Perhaps more broadly indicting, voters have not responded enthusiastically to top two elections. The 2012 top two primary had the lowest voter turnout ever for for a presidential primary - 22.47% of the eligible electorate and 31.06% of the registered voters. Then 2014 set a new low for any June primary in the state – 18.44% of the eligible electorate and 25.17% of all registered voters.
| + | - Abolish the Top Two system for state and federal elections |
| | | | |
| − | In the 2014 top two November general election, turnout fell 45.8% to 30.0% from 2012 – the largest drop of any state in the country. Under top two, fewer voters have a reason to go to the polls. In November 2010, California voters had a choice from six parties for the statewide offices, whereas in November 2014, only two. Among those that do go to the polls, many are left to vote for what they are against, because there is no candidate on the ballot that they can vote for.
| + | '''Election Dates''' |
| | | | |
| | + | - Make the June primary election and the November general election state democracy holidays |
| | | | |
| − | Redistricting - Much debate around redistricting focuses upon who should draw districts lines and how to make districts competitive. While important, these are not the primary questions to answer for a healthy democracy. More important are how many are elected per district and what is the per-capita presentation overall.
| + | '''Voter Registration''' |
| | | | |
| − | Competitive districts don't mean representative elections. By definition, single-seat, winner-take-all districts are not capable of representing the diversity of the voters. Representation requires multiple voices, even from within a given district. So whether we elect our representatives from single-seat or multi-seat districts must be answered first.
| + | - Enact same day voter registration |
| | | | |
| − | At the same time, the number of seats intersects with how many are elected per districts. California has the lowest per-capita representation for its state legislature in the United States.
| + | - Lower the voter registration age to 16, with automatic voter registration via the public schools(http://www.fairvote.org/lower_the_voting_age#why_should_we_lower_the_voting_age_to_16) |
| | | | |
| − | Tehre can be value in geogrpahic represetnation, if part oa systme tha tmixes districts and But if distircts, number should be incresed, to amek smaller and hence cost les. Any districts should be elected by ranked choice voting, to give fullest voice the voters.
| + | - Enact Permanent Portable Voter Registration, so that once an eligible citizen is on a state‘s voter rolls, they remain registered and their records move with them so long as they continue to reside in that state. |
| | | | |
| − | Additionally, the effects of redistricting and partisan / incumbent gerrymandering produce insidious distortions of 'democracy'. A study by the non-partisan Center for Voting and Democracy showed that redistricting turned 80% of congressional districts into non-competitive, one-party bastions where voters had little choice but to ratify the candidate of the major party that controlled that district. The situation has been made much worse with Top Two that disenfranchises all third parties and can even exclude major party candidates for the runoff election. In effect, politicians are choosing the runoff voters.
| + | '''Ballot Access''' |
| | | | |
| − | Campaign finance reform - This reality also impacts campaign finance reform. Campaign contributors are simply responding to high incumbent re-election rates, more than causing them. Most big donors seek to buy influence, not elections. Minor parties lose elections not because of inequity in campaign contributions, they lose because they are a minority viewpoint within a majoritarian system. In a general election, the underlying partisan views of a district's voters are far more decisive than campaign spending. "Demography is destiny..."because gerrymandered districts creates such a large majority of a particular viewpoint.
| + | - Lower the signature and fee requirements for state and federal candidates to get on the ballot in the primaries. |
| | | | |
| − | Money plays a larger role in primary elections where voters are not choosing between parties, and candidates with more money can distinguish themselves from the pack. Thus, campaign finance reform can be more effective in primary elections, as well as in single-seat state-wide elections and municipal at-large elections. The California Clean Money Campaign http://www.yesfairelections.org/ was formed in 2006 to redress the situation and to prevent undue influence of Big Money in California politics.
| + | - Offer full candidate statements in county and state voter guides at minimal costs for all ballot-qualified candidates |
| | | | |
| − | '''Proposals:''' The Green Party therefore proposes the following basic changes to in the electoral system to provide open and accountable government that is responsive to the needs of all Californians:
| + | - Restore the right to general election write-in candidacies for state and federal office |
| | | | |
| − | Electoral Reform
| + | '''Voting System Integrity''' |
| − |
| |
| − | 1. Replace the current system of with more seats including possiblity of a unicameral o
| |
| | | | |
| − | Abolish the Top Two system that perpetuates the major party hegemony and replace it with proportional representation (See
| + | - Make voting systems secure, reliable and verifiable |
| | | | |
| − | 2. Lower the signature and fee requirements to get on the ballot in the primaries.
| + | - Open source code for elections, not proprietary |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | 3. Restore write-in voting in General Elections
| |
| − | | |
| − | Financing of Elections
| |
| − | | |
| − | 4. Public financing of elections and free media access to level the playing field for getting candidates' messages to voters.
| |
| − | | |
| − | 5. Reject the notion that money in political campaigns is free speech, as interpreted by the Supreme Court decision in Buckley vs. Vallejo, and by the U.S. Supreme Court by its support of no caps on political contributions
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | 9. Combine voluntary campaign spending limits and public campaign funding to reduce money's corrupting influence on our political system.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Electoral Reform
| |
| − | | |
| − | 6. Hold elections on non-working days. Saturdays and Sundays are the worldwide day of choice. Holidays, such as Veterans Day, should also be considered.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Redistricting
| |
| − | | |
| − | 7. Take the redistricting process away from politicians and place it under the control of elected citizen boards that represent the various partisan, civic and minority constituencies. Criteria for drawing the boundaries should be developed to make all legislative districts as competitive as possible.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Supports more districts, better per capita, and a change with further census to keep ratio. Multi-seat districts. Where a combination.
| |
| − | | |
| − | 8. Run candidates reflecting the diversity of the larger culture. The Green party will strive to do this.
| |
| − | 10. Allow eligible candidates to pay postage rates one quarter of the regular rate, as well as free access to the airwaves.
| |
| − | | |
| − | 11. Establish contribution limits for Political Action Committees (PACs) with less than 50 members to prevent wealthy people from using their funds to unduly influence elections.
| |
| − | | |
| − | 12. Prohibit political parties from using "soft money" - transfers from other campaigns or party coffers - to pay for any election-related activities.
| |
| − | | |
| − | 13. State on political advertisements the sources of campaign funds in excess of $100.
| |
| − | | |
| − | 14. Oppose the resignation of a legislator to become a lobbyist on the basis of conflict of interest
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Other electoral reforms deserving our support in varying degrees are:
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | IRV is an important reform for single-seat races such as mayor, governor, Congress and state legislatures. IRV allows voters to rank their choices first, second, third, etc., and operates like a series of runoff elections. If a voter's first choice doesn't win, their vote transfers to their second choice, and so on. IRV allows voters to vote their conscience without "wasting" their vote on a candidate not likely to win, or being forced in to choosing between the "lesser of two evils."
| |
| − |
| |
| − | None of the Above (NOTA)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | NOTA can be effective in party primaries. If none of the candidates seeking the party's nomination are satisfactory, party members can vote NOTA. If NOTA wins, no candidate advances to the general election. In a general election NOTA can have mixed results. NOTA would allow voters to express their dissatisfaction with all available candidates. However, a vote for NOTA takes away the "protest votes" that would otherwise go to minor party candidates. This perpetuates the two-party monopoly by increasing their share of the total candidate-votes, further reducing the share received by minor party candidates. Also, NOTA could force a second, expensive election where the party with the most money would likely prevail.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Fusion
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Under fusion, one party can endorse another party's candidate. That candidate then appears on the ballot of all parties endorsing her or him. In winner-take-all systems, fusion can help smaller parties by allowing them to unite around a single candidate and combine their strength. However, a minor party could lose its independence by fusing with a major party candidate, thus failing to provide an alternative to the major parties.
| |
Democracy refers as much to a lively political culture as to a system of government. A diverse society needs a pluralistic structure to allow the widest possible range of views to heard. To truly enfranchise citizens, everyone must have the right and the ability to their say.
The United States has one of the lowest voter turnouts among established democracies. In a healthy democracy, high voter turnout results from the ability of voters to cast votes to elect candidates who reflect their views. By contrast, the U.S. single-seat, winner-take-all electoral system greatly limits voter choice and representation -- a disincentive to vote -- especially when combined with campaign finance laws that give disproportionate influence to big money. Many who do vote, go to the polls primarily to vote for what they are against. California's failed top two experiment has only made this worse, limiting voters to only two choices in the general election, and making primary ballot access more difficult. This reduction in choice has led to historically low voter turnout. When few eligible voters participate and elect our representatives, the legitimacy and representative nature of our democracy is diminished.
Much electoral reform debate focuses upon who should draw districts lines, and how to make district elections competitive. But competitive districts don't mean representative elections, and single-seat, winner-take-all district elections are not capable of representing the diversity of California voters.
Greens support the use of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for the state legislature, and ranked-choice voting for statewide executive office. Greens also support a larger legislature, which will allow for results to be more proportional.
- Enact a system of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for the California state legislature, and ranked choice voting for single-seat executive office. (www.cagreens.org/platform/proportional-representation
- Make the June primary election and the November general election state democracy holidays
- Enact Permanent Portable Voter Registration, so that once an eligible citizen is on a state‘s voter rolls, they remain registered and their records move with them so long as they continue to reside in that state.
- Lower the signature and fee requirements for state and federal candidates to get on the ballot in the primaries.
- Offer full candidate statements in county and state voter guides at minimal costs for all ballot-qualified candidates
- Restore the right to general election write-in candidacies for state and federal office
