Yes! PR is the way to go! With 13 councilmembers, 1/13 (7.5%) of the vote would elect YOUR party person! More Republicans, independents, more change! More people voting, because each smaller party can WIN! No waiting to run until your incumbent retires! The good of the city as a whole, not just ward by ward!
The council would then look a lot more like the citizenry. Closer to the ideal of the New England town meeting. Probably no permanent seats. Good news for most of us; bad news for less popular lifetime incumbents (and probably their main reason for opposing PR). More responsive to the people, less so to the special interests. The government exists for OUR sake, not for the sake of a few self-interested incumbents. --David Shove Roseville On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Ken & Karla wrote: > The main problem writers on this issue have talked about is geographic > chunks: districts. And gerrymandering. And whether or not a representative > lives in this piece of Minneapolis or that piece. And whether the shape of > the district is legal or too tall compared to its width. And whether every > major party was involved in the gerrymandering. And whether a lawsuit to > advance the next city council election is good or bad. > > The solution to the problem is to get rid of the gerrymandering ... and the > districts. If we elect our city council the way, say, Cambridge MA has > elected its council for over 60 years, we wouldn't have these decennial > fights that are escalating in their ferocity. We could decide once on the > system and then vote every 2 or 4 years for council members without the > acrimony about gerrymandering and lawsuits about district lines ... because > we wouldn't have to waste any time, money, or other resources redistricting. > > We ought to change the charter to elect our council representatives by > proportional representation (PR). Then we could have council members who > truly represent citizens who vote FOR them and don't have to act as if > they're going to try to represent citizens who voted against them (i.e., for > their opponent in the same district). We also could have candidates and > council members who represent our interests, not just our chunk of > geography. > > For example, if you want to vote for a fiscally conservative council > candidate, in a PR system it wouldn't matter where in the city the person > lives, just that she or he has ideas you like. In the current > district/winner-takes-all system, if that candidate is running in a > different ward, you're out of luck. > > PR is a way to improve our democracy in Minneapolis. (You can find > information about PR at http://fairvote.org/pr/index.html and locally by > contacting FairVote Minnesota; see > http://www.fairvotemn.org/contact/contact.html .) We ought to seriously > think about getting it into the charter. > > -- Ken.Bearman > King Field > (http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/citywork/planning/census2000/maps/King-Fiel > d.pdf ) > > > > REMINDERS: > 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL > PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > > For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html > For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
