Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Count me in!
Sadly, it will never happen as the partisans on both sides will fight it tooth and nail
So you wish to destroy our founding fathers purview. Got it.
So you wish to destroy our founding fathers purview. Got it.
I don't know whether FairVote.org's idea is being advanced by Republicans, Democrats or Independents, but it doesn't matter; there's no way I'd cotton to the methodology proposed in HR 3057. I don't have a problem with the end of increasing representation, its distribution and its equity, but I can see immediately that HR 3057 isn't the way to achieve those ends. It does the exact opposite; it increases the power of the majority. Increases in representation are all about ensuring that extant minority views receive representation.... toward mending our broken political process.
Fair Representation Act - Fairvote
With one, relatively minor, change we could eliminate 'lesser-of-two-evils', gerrymandering and partisan gridlock.
So, I presume what's being advocated is that the top X-quantity of vote recipients are sent to Congress. If my presumption is correct, yes, that's one way to choose federal representatives; however, it's also a way that denies and rejects the legitimacy of majority rule. Some people may indeed prefer "rule by majority" and some may prefer "rule by majority obtained by by pluralistic collaboration." EAch model has its merits and demerits.The zero-sum, winner-take-all system in which only one person is elected to represent each district no longer works in this era of hardened partisanship....Congress will remain the same size, but districts will be larger, each electing 3, 4, or 5 winners.
Why are they proposing a bill to effect a methodology that states should use to elect federal representatives? If it passes and is signed, it's implementation will be almost immediately stayed by a court and the matter will conceivably end up in the SCOTUS as a major states-rights matter. FairVote.org should pursue the matter in state legislatures and executive branches, not in the U.S. Congress.The Fair Representation Act (HR 3057)....The U.S. Constitution does not say how states should elect their Members of the House of Representatives, and states used a variety of methods for most of the nation's history. However, since 1970, every state has elected only one per district in a winner-take-all election
Oh, BS! Take states like Wyoming, which for House elections, already works in accordance with Fair's design. If five people ran, WY will still have one winner people winning and being sent to the House of Representatives will be from one party.No district will be “red” or “blue.”
So you wish to destroy our founding fathers purview. Got it.
... toward mending our broken political process.
Fair Representation Act - Fairvote
With one, relatively minor, change we could eliminate 'lesser-of-two-evils', gerrymandering and partisan gridlock.
It does the exact opposite; it increases the power of the majority. Increases in representation are all about ensuring that extant minority views receive representation.
If my presumption is correct, yes, that's one way to choose federal representatives; however, it's also a way that denies and rejects the legitimacy of majority rule.
FairVote.org should pursue the matter in state legislatures and executive branches, not in the U.S. Congress.
Oh, BS! Take states like Wyoming, which for House elections, already works in accordance with Fair's design. If five people ran, WY will still have one winner people winning and being sent to the House of Representatives will be from one party.No district will be “red” or “blue.”
In a state like MS, however many Republicans run in a given district will win, except and unless (1) there is a "big city" in that district, in which case all the winners will be democrats, or (2) there are fewer candidates running from a given party than there are available seats to be had. For instance:
- State X has 5 seats in the House and is predominantly Republican in all districts.
- If three Republicans and seven Democrats run, yes, there will be some Democratic representation from State X.
- If five or more Republicans and any quantity of Democrats run, it's unlikely that a Democrat will win any of the seats because all Republican candidates are likely to get more votes than any Democratic candidate.
Ah, since Dem's started losing elections now they want to rig them shocker. Here's a response, forget it we are going to destroy you people not bargain with you.
The districts would lessen but the number of representatives would remain the same...check. How does this prevent partisan politics? They are still sending D's and R's to Washington.
I'm not a leftie, dingleberry."Broken political process"? Lefties lose an election and assume the process is broken?
