PROPOSAL FOR LOCAL PRIMARY ELECTION CHANGE
I make the following proposal as to how Spokane might change for the better its election system for council positions. I propose that, subject to fine tuning, the top three finishers in the primary advance to the general election and that the top finisher in that election be declared the winner.
In general, it seems that an election would best fit the democracy bill if the winner were that citizen who was preferred by the greatest number of eligible voters. Now, this could be determined if any filing and official list of candidates were eliminated and we just let each voter write in his or her choice on the ballot. The winner would be the one with the most votes.
In principle, we have a version of this now since write-in votes are allowed, but with an an official list of candidates and all the campaigning associated with that fact the write-in is meaningless as a practical matter.
Getting to the nub of the major evil I'm trying to correct, note that once elected the candidate is considered by himself and others as somehow a majority choice. Of course, this is a result of the current primary system where a heads up race is forced upon the voters and then combined with talk of a duty to vote regardless as to whether you care for one candidate or the other. But it is clearly nonsense.
I am happy to move in stages. That is, go ahead with filing and all - though this probably screens out the optimal choice for the position - but pick the top three for the general election. I believe that most of the time but not always the winner will win with less than 50% and so will have a more realistic view of just where he or she stands with the electorate and so just how much legitimate authority he or she really has.
In general, it seems that an election would best fit the democracy bill if the winner were that citizen who was preferred by the greatest number of eligible voters. Now, this could be determined if any filing and official list of candidates were eliminated and we just let each voter write in his or her choice on the ballot. The winner would be the one with the most votes.
In principle, we have a version of this now since write-in votes are allowed, but with an an official list of candidates and all the campaigning associated with that fact the write-in is meaningless as a practical matter.
Getting to the nub of the major evil I'm trying to correct, note that once elected the candidate is considered by himself and others as somehow a majority choice. Of course, this is a result of the current primary system where a heads up race is forced upon the voters and then combined with talk of a duty to vote regardless as to whether you care for one candidate or the other. But it is clearly nonsense.
I am happy to move in stages. That is, go ahead with filing and all - though this probably screens out the optimal choice for the position - but pick the top three for the general election. I believe that most of the time but not always the winner will win with less than 50% and so will have a more realistic view of just where he or she stands with the electorate and so just how much legitimate authority he or she really has.
No comments:
Post a Comment