Fair Representation Act (HR 3057)

Post by vowelless » Sun, Jul 16, 2017, 3:54 PM UTC

boona wrote: post #20

vowelless wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't buy the argument that "the system is fundamentally broken" This animation visualizes the increasing partisan nature of Congress over the last 60 years: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEczkhfLwqM So the trend does not seem to be ideal here. It seems like the proposed act will directly impact this increasing split. More details: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/04/23/a-stu...

> This animation visualizes the increasing partisan nature of Congress over the last 60 years I've worked in government, and when we were asked to generate reports, there was a conclusion that they wanted to draw and they were looking for data to back it. If you ever hear something like "during the Carter era" it's likely because that's the only time the data showed what we wanted to make a point. In this case, I wou…

Post by snuxoll » Sun, Jul 16, 2017, 3:56 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #22

Has "ranked choice voting" been extensively studied in game theory? Is it the consensus that RCV is the voting system with the least number of drawbacks?

Post by ptero » Sun, Jul 16, 2017, 3:59 PM UTC

pmorici wrote: post #2

I don't buy the argument that "the system is fundamentally broken" because the political divisions of our times are some how uniquely worse than at any other point in US history. If you go read books like "A People's History of the United States" or other historical accounts that go beyond the typical 8th grade / high school US history you will find a lot of examples of when things were as bad as they are today or ar…

Post by mc32 » Sun, Jul 16, 2017, 4:04 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #29

mc32 wrote: post #9

My horse in the race did not win. It wasn't HRC. However the feeling I get is a lot of her voters are in disbelief she lost and can't understand the opponent having won. It feels as if they felt entitled to a result that didn't pan out. If HRC had won, we would not be seeing these calls for reform gain attention. That said, gerrymandering has two effects, one negative, one positive. On the negative side, there is lit…

Gerrymanding also gets used to deny the majority representation, it doesn't just get used to make safe seats. (Take an outcome matching the rightmost example at the top of this article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/03/01/this-... ) edit: Actually, no need to say "majority" above, the 2 rightmost examples end up with people being denied representation.

Post by whatupmd » Sun, Jul 16, 2017, 4:05 PM UTC

jdavis703 wrote: post #30

whatupmd wrote: post #24

I guess this is mainly about Ranked Choice voting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting "The Fair Representation Act (HR 3057) gives voters of all backgrounds and all political stripes the power to elect House Members who reflect their views and will work constructively with others in Congress." What incentive is there to "work constructively with others" in this system?

It's a bit more than just ranked choice. Since you have multiple congresspeople per district you can in theory have one extreme liberal, a centrist liberal, and a moderate conservative (I'm taking an example of a left leaning state, but the opposite could happen in a right leaning state). This eliminates the winner take all district which encourages partisanship and removes accountability.