I suppose everyone got the bad news. Thomas Jefferson said the citizens have a right to revolt.
Sass last edited by
It's so devastating. I just want to fly out to Fargo and hug everyone there.
Here's our email blast about it from Equal Vote. http://mailchi.mp/equal.vote/approval-banned
The takeaway is that backlash against having oversold RCV is indiscriminate and we (voting theorists) need to help stop the spread of misinformation.
@sarawolk Link is broken for me.
@toby-pereira Fixed it!
UPDATE: The North Dakota Governor vetoed the bill and the legislature wasn't able to get enough votes to veto the veto, so Approval Voting in Fargo stands!!!!
Montana did just successfully pass another RCV ban bill this week though.
Wow, this is wild... I hadn't heard actually. Glad the governor vetoed, but the audacity of it just goes to show how much power the choice of voting system carries.
Here's the Governor's veto letter. It's really good!
Elsewhere in this forum, I mention the idea of promoting "Disapproval Voting" (which all of us know is the same as Approval Voting in regard to the power relations created) to forestall the accusation of violating One Person, One Vote (OPOV). The above statement from the governor confirms that people do think that Approval violates OPOV.
@jack-waugh I think the key is to educate people and especially politicians that the definition of One Person One Vote is an Equally Weighted Vote. That said, it's not intuitive and probably will lose most people unless they care to spend some time on it.
To me this is one of the biggest reasons I don't think Approval (despite it's simplicity) is the reform that can beat RCV. That and the fact that you can't show you prefer your favorite over your lesser evil without approving them both.
I still think Approval is a good system and if I could snap my fingers I'd make it the default everywhere, but still.
I think the key is to educate people and especially politicians that the definition of One Person One Vote is an Equally Weighted Vote. That said, it's not intuitive and probably will lose most people unless they care to spend some time on it.
To me this is one of the biggest reasons I don't think Approval (despite it's simplicity) is the reform that can beat RCV.
Approval voting is an equally weighted vote isn't it? By the definition I think you use, one person can cancel out another person's vote by approving the opposite candidates.
(That's not to say I think approval voting is the best method.)
@toby-pereira Right, that's what I'm saying. I should have been more clear.
Approval, STAR, Ranked Robin, Score, etc. all pass the Equality Criterion. The Equality Criterion is literally the test of One Person, One Vote, ie an equally weighted vote, according to the Supreme Court, but because you're voting for multiple candidates and you're literally casting multiple votes, it really doesn't seem like it.
The Approval pitch that "the candidate with the most votes wins" explicitly defines an Approval as a vote and states that each voter can cast multiple votes. (This makes Approval comply with Plurality laws, but not "vote for 1" laws.)
So, explaining why Approval does pass One Person, One Vote isn't easy, especially on the scale needed. In any case, it's absolutely something CES needs to get in front of.
In contrast, in STAR and RCV your vote ultimately only counts for one candidate, or as an abstention between the finalists. Oregon, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania all have constitutions that requite voters to only cast a vote for one candidate, so this is important legally.