I have an op-ed today in the New York Daily News. It opens:
It was a strange coalition that opposed ranked-choice voting in New York City last week: conservative Republicans and black elected officials. Even stranger was that both groups made the same sorts of arguments, claiming RCV would fuel voter confusion and depressed turnout, especially in minority communities.
Since that sort of coalition its likely to appear elsewhere, we may want to unpack its logic. Doing so means learning about two kinds of ranked-choice voting. And understanding that as long as people keep pushing the single-winner form, Republicans and voting-rights groups are likely to keep fighting it.
This was a difficult piece to write, and if you know me, you know why.
I also want to thank those people whose ideas appear at various points. If you are reading, thank you.
And, yes, I now remember that it was Hare/Andrae. Sorry!
More parties, two weak parties, or no parties?
Historically in the U.S., electoral system reforms have come as part of larger packages. Two new packages have caught my eye, so I thought it might be helpful to note them in one place.
Continue reading “Competing reform packages”
My RCV bibliography lists books and articles that are research-heavy, but I wanted to keep track of other important texts as well. Some are from the movement itself, and others debate its proposals.
This is a non-exhaustive and evolving list. Entries are organized by period: recent books, slightly older (1990s-early 2000s), old (1890s-1940s), and very old (1860s-80s). Readers interested in very deep PR history can visit this page at the PR Foundation website.
It is an interesting list to compile. The farther back one goes in time, the harder it is to distinguish social science from advocacy.
Continue reading “Popular books on voting reform”