Ben advocated well for question two but he was up against a pretty stiff and well informed opinion of Representative Patricia Walrath – a moderate democrat who represents Hudson, Maynard, and Stow.
Ben pointed out that multiple party endorsement was standard operating procedure for the country about 90 years ago and is current procedure in New York general elections.
Ben feels that Q2 is a way to get support for democratic candidates while allowing people to associate with a smaller parties. (Ben I hope I represented your views correctly – if not, please comment and correct my mistatements)
Rep. Walrath on the other hand, is concerned about the strength of the two party system and fears that Question 2 could make it even weaker.
I see both Ben and Rep. Walrath’s points but currently, I’m in the same camp as Rep. Walrath.
I am concerned that our legislature will look like the Isralie Knesset. The Knesset is currently made up of no less than 12 parties! (and a look back through the Wiki shows that it has been made up of as many as 15 parties). If question 2 passed, it would create an “opening” for multiple small parties, contribute to a fracturing of the big parties, and ultimately slow the legislative process.
I understand the motivation for Question 2 however.
If the big parties do a lousy job of “opening up the tent” and addressing all issues, Those who feel their issues are not being addressed splinter off into a small “single issue” parties. This, they hope, will get their issue greater recognition.
Though I’m leaning “No” on 2, I’m still open and would love to read others opinions, thoughts, experience etc…
Mark
I understand your concern about 12 parties being in the legislature, but question 2 would have the opposite effect. It would, in fact, act as a safety valve.
<
p>
Currently if someone feels that their issues concerns are not being met by the major parties they would join a minor party. This effort would then work against the major parties. For the sake of discussion lets stay on the democratic side. So they work for the green-rainbow party… and what… take votes away from the democrat with no chance of winning. If instead they have the Working Families Party (The party in NY that I like), they can still support the democratic nominee but actually use their vote as a second message. I worked for the WFP in NY during Clinton’s first run for the senate. We brought out a lot of people who wouldn’t vote for her by saying that your vote counts twice. Once to help elect hillary but then also to tell her why you are electing her.
<
p>
So in new york you don’t see people in the conservative party or WFP in the legislature. Fusion voting works against this, but that isn’t the goal anymore. If you don’t have that the only goal of a minor party is either to be spoiler or to try to get your people elected. But in fusion voting it is to gain influence for your positions by being able to negotiate with the major parties and show what percentage of their voting bloc passionately support these issues. It has been said that no GOP statewide candidate has won without the support of the conservative party, which thus gives them a lot of influence. I would love to see that in Massachusetts, but with the Working Families Party, , which is made up of community and labor organizations.
I forgot to mention that ReformerBen made the same point at our meeting. Thanks for posting.
<
p>
Do you have numbers from recent NY fusion votes? (i’ll do a bit of googling myself)
<
p>
M.
Electoral reforms such as Q2 are important, as the two party system does not represent strength, but rather a weakness that forces people into very specific camps that prevents other, perfectly valid viewpoints from being heard. Here on BMG, there has been some praise for the words spoken by Grace Ross in the gubernatorial campaign, yet the typical response is to suggest that she join the Democratic Party. Realistically, though, the Dems would no sooner have Grace Ross (certainly not running for governor) than she would have the Dems.
<
p>
Q2 gives the smaller parties the option of endorsing candidates from other parties, usually one of the 2 major parties. As you might see from the experience in New York, the smaller parties only occasionally will run their own candidates. More often, they use their party platform to put forth certain issues on which they can challenge the major party candidates, then go ahead and endorse one of those candidates (click here for New York Working Families Party endorsements – it appears to be exclusively Democratic).
<
p>
More important reforms would be the enactment of Ranked Choice, or instant runoff, voting for single-seat races (such as the race for governor) or proportional representation for legislatures. First, by using RCV/IRV, there would no longer be any “spoiler” arguments, which have been used as wedges in Presidential and gubernatorial races alike. (Click here to read about RCV/IRV and its many advantages.)
<
p>
Second, proportional representation makes sure that the legislature looks like the electorate. Is Massachusetts 80% Democrat? No. So why should the legislature be that way? I believe that a legislature elected through PR would be more responsive to their communities, less likely to be subject to lobbyist influence and more able to work through problems because legislatures could not rely upon gerrymandered districts to protect them.
<
p>
Finally, your comment about the Israeli legislature is valid. However, the problem there is not inherently one of proportional representation, but how it is implemented. Israel has a very low vote threshold to get a party candidate elected, which results in a much larger number of parties represented in the legislature, and perhaps more fractured politics. Other countries, such as Germany, have higher thresholds and therefore fewer parties represented (but always more than two). (Click here for a good review of PR.)
<
p>
I am leaning in favor of Q2, but only if RCV/IRV and PR are also given a real chance to be considered. While I would agree that a 12-party system may be difficult to administer, the two options we have now are simply not enough.