[GPSCC-chat] Fwd: Prop 14 (Top Two) forum in Santa Claraon Tuesday, Marc...

[Gerry Gras]

The German system was similar.

It also had half district seats and half party seats.
But as I recall, you did not have to make a choice
between district or party.  If you ran, you were
automatically in both.  Otherwise I think it was
the same.


Gerry


Tian Harter wrote:

> I can say a few words about the New Zealand system, which I've been
> watching as a hobby for many years. Their system is what's refered to
> as a "mixed member system", meaning half are elected proportionally,
> and half are elected by districts. When a voter goes to vote there,
> they get two votes. The first is a district vote, and the second is a
> Party vote. When someone decides to run for office there, the first
> question is probably: do I want to go for party votes or district votes?
> 
> Each Party is responsible for coming up with ways to earn party votes.
> They also give the vote officials a list of party members in the order
> the would get elected if enough voters voted for them. The New Zealand
> Greens turn in a list with something like a dozen names on it, but as
> a practical matter usually the top four to six get seated.
> 
> District vote elections are handled much like our Congressional or
> Assembly elections. It's winner take all. Jeanette Fitzsimons, who
> recently retired as co-leader of the NZ Greens was elected that way
> many times, because she was well known enough in the district for that.
> 
> Most of the Greens in the Govt. were elected on the party list though,
> because they weren't well enough known to take a district. Also, the
> Greens are one of the few international parties, and we benefit from
> being on the front lines of issues like climate change. For a long time
> I was carrying around the flier they gave out to earn Party votes.
> I wish I could show it to you, but I've given it away now.
> 
> Tian
> 
> spencerg wrote:
> 
>>Hi, Cameron:
>>
>>
>>      Yes, that was what I was looking for.  Thanks.
>>
>>
>>      That raises another question:  What's the difference between this
>>Prop 14 system and the general / runoff system used in many other
>>countries where third parties thrive?
>>
>>
>>      Best Wishes,
>>      Spencer
>>
>>
>>On 3/23/2010 5:02 PM, Cameron L. Spitzer wrote:
>>
>>>I suspect Spencer was looking for some history to complement
>>>our already plausible conclusions about the intent and
>>>effect of top-two.  Not dismissing our reasoning.
>>>
>>>We now have per-party-primaries, which the parties can open if
>>>they choose, followed by a general election.
>>>
>>>Top-two replaces that system.  The new system has no
>>>per-party-primaries, a mid-year general election, and a runoff
>>>in the fall.  Without per-party-primaries, party affiliation
>>>has no legal meaning.
>>>
>>>It's easy to be confused by funny terms like "open primary."
>>>When candidates from all parties run against one another, that's
>>>not a primary, it's a general election.
>>>
>>>Several states already do that, all that's different is the
>>>schedule.  So the "evidence" Spencer wants can be found in
>>>the experience in those states.  Georgia, Virginia,
>>>Washington.  Washington had a sort of Nader campaign club
>>>in 2000, which disappeared shortly after that election,
>>>but never got a Green Party together.  Georgia was one of
>>>the first US states that organized a Green political club,
>>>and it even formed locals in the larger counties, but never
>>>reached a thousand members, despite two decades of relatively
>>>competent organizing effort.  Virginia got started later
>>>but the story's the same.  You could run down the chart
>>>in _Ballot Access News_ and catch the rest.  States with
>>>"open primaries" or no party-voter affiliation
>>>don't grow Green Parties.  The correlation is just
>>>about absolute.  The only thing missing is an experiment
>>>where a state takes away party-voter affiliation that it
>>>used to have.
>>>
>>>
>>>-Cameron
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>sosfbay-discuss mailing list
>>>sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
>>>http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
>>>   
>>>
>