Annie Young wrote: > At first I thought this e-mail was going to address another view such as moving to citywide council members which would also eliminate all the problems created with redistricting. ====== [KB:] That's one way Minneapolis could design its elections using proportional representation. It's how Cambridge MA elects its city council. Candidates run citywide in a preference-ballot form of PR, where the voter ranks the candidates from 1 for what we now would mark with an X, 2 for her/his 2d choice, and so on through as many candidates as the voter wants to express a preference for. As I said, it's worked there for over 60 years, and those folks probably aren't any smarter than Minneapolitans.
David Shove wrote: > PR is the way to go! With 13 councilmembers, 1/13 (7.5%) of the vote would elect YOUR party person! ====== [KB:] With a citywide system like Cambridge's, that winning vote actually would be a larger percentage of the votes than we currently see in our ward elections. Now, with about 1/13th of the population in each ward, the winner can have as little as 50%+, or just over 1/26th, of the city's voters. (Usually, of course, the winners have 60-80% in their ward, but that's still less than 1/13th.) PR winners would be clearly representing their voters, too. And, unlike in wards, almost every voter would help elect someone to the council; now, every vote cast for the loser is a wasted vote in the sense that it resulted in no representation. David Shove continued: > More Republicans, independents, more change! ====== [KB:] That's true. Candidates representing city groups now shut out of the council -- such as Republicans, IPers, and others who support issues rather than parties -- can attract supporters who don't happen to live close together but are subject to the council's actions. And: > More people voting ... ====== [KB:] Also true. In almost every place on the planet where PR is used in elections, voter turnout is significantly higher than in American elections. One reason probably is that campaigns are run much more on issues than personalities, advertising, or money (contributions). Candidates or parties try to attract voters, not repel their opponent's voters. Brian Melendez wrote: > FairVote Minnesota (http://www.fairvotemn.org/) sponsored a petition two years ago for a charter amendment adopting instant-runoff voting ====== [KB:] Actually, it was an unaffiliated group of citizens who led the petition drive. FVM is a 501(c)(3) educational nonprofit and provided information and technical support. -- Ken . Bearman King Field ||||| (o o) ~~~~oOOo~(_)~oOOo~~~~ "The important thing is not to stop questioning." - Albert Einstein 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
