When the phrase “CAN’T WIN” is applied to a candidate whose values you basically agree with, what is really being said is “YOU CAN’T WIN!”
This is a system problem, not a problem of you as an individual. Those who want to concentrate money and power in their own hands spend a lot of energy making us believe that everything is our individual problem. They also want to keep us from realizing how much power we have now, both as individuals, and as communities organizing together so that we and our next generations CAN WIN — we can live, and even thrive!
In the area of our elections, we can move toward solutions both as individuals and in groups. This piece contains a valuable “recipe.” Also, at the end is a link to a talk I gave recently on the subject.
Recipe for a Real Democracy
KEY INGREDIENT
Proportional Representation (PR) is the pot-of-gold that truly allows for a multi-party system, one in which people do not have to “hold their noses” or play games with their votes. It expands the pool of parties that really “can win” and in that way empowers voters to vote for what you want.
Proportional Representation empowers us to vote directly FOR what we really want — rather than AGAINST what we fear the most. In that way, PR works together with and strengthens the other political reforms listed later in this “recipe”, like ranked choice voting and “clean money” campaigns. With PR, other commonly proposed electoral reforms, like term limits or changing the way gerrymandered districts are drawn, are shown to be unnecessary.
Does PR work? Yes, voters in more than 90 countries understand Proportional Representation, and have used it to elect their legislative representatives. By implementing PR, nations allow for and support multiple parties. These 90 countries have leap-frogged over our Democracy 101, which was state-of-the-art once upon a time, but that was more than 200 years ago!
What is PR? Imagine, as an example of Proportional Representation, that instead of a current set of five single-member districts, your area has one five-member district. If voters like an alternative party — for example, the Green Party (or Peace and Freedom in California) or the Libertarian Party — and they get 20% of the vote, they are elected to the legislature. (Note: This Proportional Representation idea is not just about being proportional related to population size, but rather to voter choice — values held by people. Also, PR is not the same as a parliamentary system.)
When no-corporate-money parties, such as the Greens and Peace and Freedom, have a place at the table when policies are being discussed, ideas are brought forth that otherwise would never see the light of day. Even the old-time, corporate-funded members can be pressured into voting for policies they have previously managed to avoid, such as raising the federal minimum wage from the current $7.25 per hour (!); or making sure everyone has a roof over their head like other countries manage to do; or such as implementing the kind of healthcare-for-everyone that people in other countries, certainly the wealthy industrialized ones, take for granted.
Without PR and without additional parties at the table, the two Titanic Parties continue business-as-usual, continue getting elected, and continue blaming the other Titanic Party for anything they themselves refuse to accomplish for the people.
What’s the current system? The US uses “first-past-the-post,” winner-take-all to tally votes. This results in a two-party system with gerrymandered districts where up to 49% or even more of the voters in each district end up with a representative we do not want.
Even though the approval rating of Congress is often in the teens or low twenties, it’s very hard to get rid of these “representatives.” Before they even lift a finger in their new term, Congresspersons have about a 95% chance of getting re-elected next time, no matter what they do in between. With Proportional Representation, they find themselves in competitive races in multi-member districts. Voters have more viable can-win options, and so they are more likely to vote. Incumbents lose their seats if they don’t deliver.
Who’s working on PR? More and more people and groups are advocating now for this transformational electoral reform. At the national level, Fix Our House makes the urgent case for PR in the US House of Representatives, and it would not need to jump the high hurdle of a constitutional amendment, just a repeal or reform of a 1967 law prohibiting multi-member districts. Many other groups are also advocating for this crucial reform, such as New America, and Protect Democracy. 200 Democracy Scholars wrote a letter to Congress calling for Proportional Representation. At the California state level, there’s the ProRep Coalition.
MORE INGREDIENTS TO ADD
The all-important system of Proportional Representation also enhances the power of other important reforms. With a multi-party system, the rotten words that become obsolete include “gerrymandering” and “spoiler!” We could stop “holding our noses”, “voting for the lesser of two evils”, and “wasting our votes.” How? By making it clear to voters and candidates that not just the two Titanic Parties “CAN WIN!”
- Ranked Choice Voting. While important for executive offices like President, Governor, and Mayor (versus legislative offices), RCV has not really helped achieve the desired multi-party system. It appears that rather than vote for exactly the values they like the most, voters still concentrate on the front-runner “can-win” candidates. PR allows you to form the habit of voting for what you really want, after looking at all the legislative candidates.
- Open Debates. Give people what they’ve been calling for in poll after poll: more than just two parties in debates. At the presidential level, it would make perfect sense to open the debates to all candidates who could possible win. In recent presidential debates, that would have included the Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, and Green Parties. After all, while the Dems and Reps start out with ballot access in every state, the Greens and Libertarians have to successfully fight for and achieve ballot access in each state in order to merely allow voters to vote for their candidates. The question of who runs the debates is important. The League of Women Voters used to run them as a public service, but they don’t now. The League refused to “help perpetrate a fraud.” Now the two parties themselves run the debates, as a private service.
- Free and Equal Airtime. To illustrate the importance of this, I will tell a personal story about running for California Governor as a Green Party candidate in 2010, (which was a prime time to “follow the money” and advocate for Public Banking after the Wall Street Banks had caused a global financial meltdown). Meg Whitman (R) ran against Jerry Brown (D) and spent $144 million of her own money, which still left her a billionaire after she lost to Brown. I realized that if I, as a no-corporate-money candidate, were given the choice between using her $144 million or getting the media exposure she got for free, including broadcast debates, I would have chosen the free airtime. (Unbelievably, despite my being a gubernatorial candidate on the ballot, during one of the debates I was arrested while attempting to merely be in the audience. I was charged, accurately, with “trespassing at a private party”). Cutting candidates out of media time is a way the powers-that-be, including those owning media outlets, can block alternative candidates, ideas, and solutions.
- “Clean Money” Public Campaign Finance. Although it’s essential to get money out of politics, with the combination of proportional representation, ranked choice voting, open debates, and free airtime, “dirty money” (e.g. corporate money “invested” in politicians by Wall Street and the war, pharmaceutical, oil and other industries) would have much less of an advantage. In a five-member district, even less-well-funded candidates can win. They can get votes based on their values, not campaign “war chests.”
- Paper ballots combined with computerized voting systems. This makes audits easy rather than impossible like audits of state and national elections are today in the US. Former president Carter studied a lot of electoral systems and called Venezuela’s “the best in the world.” Despite its high quality system, Venezuela is often accused of fraudulent elections whenever they elect presidents more aligned with their own people than with the interests of the major western powers.
- Other Essential Ingredients. Add many other ways to empower voters and ordinary folks, like weekend elections, secure same-day voter registration, civics education, and citizen assemblies with the power to make decisions.
INGREDIENTS TO EXCLUDE FROM THE RECIPE
Electoral College. Abolish the Electoral College. Elect the President by popular vote. Too bad the US Constitution is so difficult to amend — stagnant rather than stable. In the past fifty years only one amendment to the constitution passed, and it was first proposed in 1789! A work-around in progress is National Popular Vote. Let’s stop an old, outrageous, based-on-slavery system that allowed electoral losers like Donald Trump and George W. Bush to take the presidency without winning the popular vote!
Term Limits. People get so fed up with politicians that they think an obvious solution is to limit all politicians’ time in office. With the multi-member districts of Proportional Representation, however, it’s far easier to vote out the bad. Let’s keep good, hard-working public officials who have gained experience and earned their re-elections.
Top-Two Primary. The best thing to say about the terrible Top-Two Primary is that its backers were hoping to spread it from California, Washington, and Louisiana to states across the nation, and that has not happened. Top-Two increases the power of the two-party system, and kills off many independent candidates in the primary election, eliminating their party’s participation in November elections.
Combine the good ingredients, and we can have a real democracy. Serves millions.
A good basic approach toward a better elections and a better world is to “follow our hearts” and do what calls to us, as we stop the bad, advance the good, and change the process.
In closing, I recently gave a talk at the Institute for Critical Studies of Society: Democracy 101 in Need of an Update, and the Role of Third Parties.
Your comments, on all of the above, are welcome.