Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frumple]

Look, if we're going to take over europe, shoving it all together and splitting it into 50 even pieces isn't going to be a substantiative issue. We've even more or less got practice in the best* ways of doing so!

*Insofar as destabilizing and hamstringing a region goes, anyway :V

[Bauglir]

Every seat has its own election. Each state has two Senate seats that are voted on by the whole state every six years (they're staggered so they don't get voted on in the same year), and a varying number of House seats that are voted on every two years by districts of states with relatively equal population.

This is precisely why it's possible for a Congress with a 10% approval rating to have a 90% reelection rate.

[smjjames]

Every seat has its own election. Each state has two Senate seats that are voted on by the whole state every six years (they're staggered so they don't get voted on in the same year), and a varying number of House seats that are voted on every two years by districts of states with relatively equal population.

This is precisely why it's possible for a Congress with a 10% approval rating to have a 90% reelection rate.

Any idea how to fix though?

De-gerrymandering the districts would definetly be a start.

[Frumple]

Have the requirement for running for a second term to be surviving public self-immolation, naked. That'd fix the reelection rate right quick, one way or another.

... or we could fix the gerrymandering, I guess. That would involve considerably less flaming politicians, though...

[Helgoland]

Every seat has its own election. Each state has two Senate seats that are voted on by the whole state every six years (they're staggered so they don't get voted on in the same year), and a varying number of House seats that are voted on every two years by districts of states with relatively equal population.

This is precisely why it's possible for a Congress with a 10% approval rating to have a 90% reelection rate.

Any idea how to fix though?

De-gerrymandering the districts would definetly be a start.

Go look into the German election system - it combines the advantages of having a local representatives with an immunity against gerrymandering.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundestag#Election
Apparently the system is called Mixed-Member Proportional Representation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-member_proportional_representation

[MetalSlimeHunt]

We've had the discussion before, and the main issue is that MMP would instantly turn the US into a oligarchy via party bosses and at least half of elected officials being appointed instead.

[Helgoland]

Oligarchy? In MPP small parties can rise fairly easily...

[FearfulJesuit]

Oligarchy? In MPP small parties can rise fairly easily...

This has its own issues, though- look at the Knesset: one of the reasons Israel's government is so difficult to deal with is that the balance of power in its legislature is held by ultra-Orthodox parties with one or two seats, so everyone has to pander to them.

Germany has a cutoff system, yes, where you need at least 5% of the vote to get any seats?

[RedKing]

I believe Israel instituted a higher minimum threshold this time around as well, 3.25% instead of the previous 2%. This only wound up disqualifying one party which would have previously picked up a seat, Yachad (a far-right splinter of Shas) which had 2.97%.

[FearfulJesuit]

I believe Israel instituted a higher minimum threshold this time around as well, 3.25% instead of the previous 2%. This only wound up disqualifying one party which would have previously picked up a seat, Yachad (a far-right splinter of Shas) which had 2.97%.

TIL.

[Helgoland]

Germany has a cutoff system, yes, where you need at least 5% of the vote to get any seats?

Yep, 5% or at least three direct mandates to get seats via your list - one of the lessons from the Weimar Republic. Anything else would be madness.

[GreatJustice]

Every seat has its own election. Each state has two Senate seats that are voted on by the whole state every six years (they're staggered so they don't get voted on in the same year), and a varying number of House seats that are voted on every two years by districts of states with relatively equal population.

This is precisely why it's possible for a Congress with a 10% approval rating to have a 90% reelection rate.

Any idea how to fix though?

De-gerrymandering the districts would definetly be a start.

Go look into the German election system - it combines the advantages of having a local representatives with an immunity against gerrymandering.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundestag#Election
Apparently the system is called Mixed-Member Proportional Representation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-member_proportional_representation

The immediate issues I'm seeing from this:
-Your representative doesn't actually represent his "district" in any meaningful sense, he represents the party he's running for (on that note, that raises the question of what MPs are even needed for in this system when you could just have the party leaders cast all the votes, with their vote percentage determining how many votes they get)
-This being the case, there wouldn't be any congressmen or senators that more or less stick to their guns in representing their views, and instead each party would largely be a homogenous blob of moderates. So instead of Warrens, Duciniches, Pauls and Snowes, you would have party composed of Hillary Clinton and another filled with Jeb Bush.

[Helgoland]

-Well sure, but that's no different than the current American system: A congressman represents his district, but also has to look out for the interests of his party because they'll be bankrolling his re-election campaign.
-Tell that to Ströbele And again, party discipline is a thing even in today's US.

[Reelya]

There are other ideas though, such as multi-member electorates. i.e. consolidate congressional regions down a little, and you vote in the "top 2" or "top 3" guys per region. This has some potential benefits especially when combined with instant run-off voting, although it needs a caveat that excess votes for a winning candidate get distributed to the next in line.

having 3-seat districts, would basically force all major parties to offer more than one candidate each per district for you to vote for, for your congressional district (so they can get 2 out of the 3 seats), while making traditional gerrymandering very hard to pull off / limited rewards. In a 2-party system, with 3 seats per voting district, it would basically be a given that one Republican and one Democrat would get elected, but there would be that swing vote for the third seat, and they'd have to field 2 of each Rep/Dems for you to pick from. In other words, depending on how you do it, it would emphasize individual merits of politicians over increased party line adherence.

I think this model would be simpler and would work better in America than the Mixed Member Proportional system. There's no need for things like party lists and the like this way.

[FearfulJesuit]

a few glasses of malbec on my lunch date- in this moment, I am euphoric

nixon now, muthafuckas.