Fear of Clowns

"Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable."
- H. L. Mencken
gozz@gozz.com

Saturday, April 09, 2005

This guy needs some proportional representation 

a few colors of peppers

From the NY Times,

Arthur J. Finkelstein, a prominent Republican consultant who has directed a series of hard-edged political campaigns to elect conservatives in the United States and Israel over the last 25 years, said Friday that he had married his male partner in a civil ceremony at his home in Massachusetts.

Mr. Finkelstein ... said in a brief interview that he had married his partner of 40 years to ensure that the couple had the same benefits available to married heterosexual couples.

I don't know anything about Finkelstein, but I see the facts related in the article as a good example of a flaw in our system of government: it's difficult to impossible for minority voices - like gay republicans - to have much of a say about their issues. When only two parties are vying for more votes than the other, it's not easy for any minority viewpoint to be heard without a splintering off from dominant parties - which has happened as a result of the abolitionist and temperance movements. And some say it may be happening now concerning the way the Texas GOP has been trampling hog-wild over the Republican party as a whole.

I think we'd be better off with a House of Representatives in which at least a portion of the seats were at-large and determined by proportional voting: if a party gets 5% of the vote, 5% of the seats go to that party, they get 25%, the party gets 25%. This is how most nations elect their legislative branch - including Iraq. I think it's a better system: it would give real representation to all sorts of views coming out of our melting pot - like those of conservative gays - as well as help to keep the Republicans and Democrats honest.

Post a Comment

Comments:

eric,
No shit. A two party system ultimatley just fails to legislate responsibly. With a popultion of 293,027,571 how can two parties remotely represent everyone or even most of us. All that ever happens is the minority party unifies while the majority party, having made it, fractures because everyone wants something different.

In a representative democracy we have a responsability to vote for the best candidate. Voting for the lesser of two evils (as I did in the last presidential election)is not democracy.The republicratic stranglehold on our country ensure that the real losers are us. I don't remember who to attribute the quote to, sorry, "governments and those who govern are most notably ungoverned." This unfortunatley holds true here.

I actualy touched on this, well yesterday morning, in a post about the genocide in Darfur.
Nice idea, but I'm not sure it would work here in the USA where people can say that they belong to one party, but not agree with everything the party says. We already should elect people irregardless of their party affiliation and look instead to what they stand for.
What "wouldn't work" about it?

It's just a different way of electing officials that I think is more fairly representational.

 

Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
Listed on BlogShares