My latest column in Urban Tulsa Weekly, which was filed on Monday, before the election, recommends switching city elections from the current primary/general structure to a multi-partisan instant-runoff election. Note that I said multi-partisan, not non-partisan. (I don't write the headlines or cutlines for my stories.) My column explains the distinction and how my proposal gives voters more choice and more information than either the current system or a non-partisan system.
« End of the line | Main | DoubleShot across the bow »
Multi-partisan city elections, not non-partisan
About
This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on April 5, 2006 12:16 PM.
The previous post in this blog was End of the line.
The next post in this blog is DoubleShot across the bow.
For the latest entries, visit the main page, which also has links to archives by month and by category.
Contact
BlogAds
Blog Ad Swap
Support BatesLine
BatesLine is PayPal Verified
Recent Posts
- A succinct and well-linked rationale for voting no
- 4.0 frustration
- Sign suppression
- Both sides now
- Joel Kotkin on civic improvement schemes and city policy
- Steed on voter apathy and lobbyist power
- Upgrade in progress
- Elections are still a spectator sport in Delaware County
- Letters to the editor self-selection
- More bridges to nowhere
Search
Powered by
Movable Type Publishing Platform 4.0
Movable Type Publishing Platform 4.0
Comments (3)
Couldn't the number of PAC endorsements become extremely lengthy for a ballot?
IRV in Party Primaries seemed a good idea. I'm not so sure about this one.
Convience me.
Posted by XonOFF | April 5, 2006 8:32 PM
Posted on April 5, 2006 20:32
Your IRV propsal has a lot of merit and deserves serious discussion/consideration. I believe, when provided with a factual understanding of the issues and the players involved, the electorate will collectively make wise choices.
Posted by Twatch | April 6, 2006 10:25 AM
Posted on April 6, 2006 10:25
XonOFF, I didn't get into all the practical details. There would have to be some sort of word limit or character limit for each candidate. Each PAC might register an authorized abbreviation or short name along with their list of endorsements, e.g., "The following candidates are authorized to use 'Homeowners for Fair Zoning' or the abbreviation 'HFFZ' on the city ballot." This is similar to the way party nominations are handled in parliamentary democracies like the UK.
Let me know what your other objections/concerns are, and I'll try to answer them.
Posted by Michael Bates | April 6, 2006 10:50 AM
Posted on April 6, 2006 10:50