We are a rare pair in American politics.
One of us, a Republican, laments the government’s involvement in people’s lives and its innate ability to make matters worse. Another Democrat believes that if the government does not solve America’s biggest problems, from climate change to social equality, no one will.
We don’t agree on many things – but we do agree on three important points:
- America’s political system is failing.
- America’s political system will not self-correct.
- To force an amendment, we need to change the incentive structure for elected officials.
At the best of times, our elected officials aim to work in the public interest despite failing arrangements and do so in a financially responsible manner with the consent of the rulers. At the worst of times, as we are witnessing today, our leaders are captured by the system and armed with zero-sum politics, causing catastrophic disasters for the country.
But whatever the time, each of us has the ability to choose what to fight for and who to fight with. The two of us, the Conservatives and the Liberals, have decided to put aside our biases and fight together as co-directors of the new organization, the Institute for Political Innovation: forcing this complex amendment into our political system so that elected officials Policy The problem is over Political Problems
We still believe that the unique fundamentals of our party platform are essential to our worldview, but we also hate that our party officials kneel before extreme voters and small groups of special interests, and as a result, are rarely reflected, respected, or even considered cross. By- bias
Maybe you’re like us.
Maybe you are losing faith in your elected leaders and questioning their motives. You are right. Like rational actors in any industry, elected officials respond to self-interest and enthusiasm প্রথম first and foremost, the possibility of their selection. As our founder, Katherine Gehl, a business leader and promoter of political industry theory, told thousands of people as we built our movement, “In our current system, our elected officials have nothing to do with problem solving and are likely to be re-elected.”
How do we reconnect those interests in the most powerful and achievable way? The answer is simple. Start with what the ruling incentives determine: a party primary election.
As many Americans are beginning to understand, the party primary is the election that is important today. More than 0% of the House of Representatives have won their seats in their party primaries সত্য less of a race for truth-friendly tactics and voter participation, as it is more on wage issues and partisanship. In rare cases where a general election is relevant, a majority is not required to win because of a majority vote, or a “first-past-the-post vote”, a symbol brought by boat from Britain. Leading party primary and multi-party candidates together to the right or left and taking them out of mutually biased negotiators.
We can change this by adjusting how the primaries work and selecting the general selection count. This is already happening in what we call “Final-Five Voting”, a biased-agnostic two-step invention.
Final-five voting uses a single, top-five primary where all eligible candidates, regardless of party registration, face all voters. The top five voters advance to the general election where voters place their order in the order of preference. The winner is the person who gets the true majority support – over 50% – either in the first round or through a series of instant runoffs.
The beauty of the final-five is its simplicity: more choice among the candidates means more voice for the voters and better results from our elected officials. Candidates from all parties can sue them initially and if they take their ideas (including their party identity) to the general public, they have the power to campaign to the full electorate – not just the majority – if they want to win.
From there the whole legal calculus changes. With the threat of being “primordial” through ranking rankings in general elections and the injection of massive voter accountability, officials have to do their job – negotiate, contract, navigate complex trade-offs of the law that solve big problems or lose their jobs.
While this sounds great in theory, is it effective? Yes. Thanks to the citizens of Alaska who were upset, the final-five style selection already exists. In 2022, Alaska will follow this approach.
But does it work? Yes. Just days after the Alaskans held better elections, the state legislature brokered a budget pass that had previously led to the closure of an inevitable government. Why is this? Because legislators now know that when they are ready for re-election, they will have to answer to ordinary voters for what they do (or don’t) do. Accountability is back in Alaska – and every state in the Union is empowered to make the same change today.
Again, we do not agree on many things. We’ll probably be more comfortable arguing across the table than working shoulder to shoulder এবং and if we do our job of advancing the final-five voting, it will be our reward, with one important difference: our parties will have more ideas for the next primary. Stronger than.