[QUOTE]AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) — Maine's highest court could decide to weigh in on the constitutionality of a dramatic election overhaul approved by voters last fall, and parties on both sides of the issue faced probing questions by justices in a packed courtroom Thursday.[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/maine/articles/2017-04-13/maines-highest-court-to-hear-ranked-choice-voting-arguments"]https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/maine/articles/2017-04-13/maines-highest-court-to-hear-ranked-choice-voting-arguments[/URL]
Here's an argument: we're fucking sick of the 2 party system being played to the detriment of everyone except those already in power.
[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;52103513]Here's an argument: we're fucking sick of the 2 party system being played to the detriment of everyone except those already in power.[/QUOTE]
And we're sick of the only two options on offer being cookie cutter shitheads differing only in the hue of the bullshit they spew.
Even though the winner takes all/First-Past-The-Post voting and method of representations on larger scales are, in my opinion, not the best way to do things, ranked choice is a better way to do them than what we have now.
Update for those curious about the particulars of this hearing. The three main questions are as follows:
[B]1. Does RCV violate the "sort, count, declare" provisions in the state constitution?[/B]
No, because votes are still sorted by candidate, counted accordingly, and a winner declared. The actual voting procedure is not specifically described.
[B]2. Does RCV violate the "plurality" provisions?[/B]
Again no. The plurality clause is intended to eliminate the need for multiple elections or legislative tie breakers if no candidate receives an outright majority, as in the case of the 2010 gubinatorial. The term itself is intended to apply only to the number of votes required to win an election, and doesn't prescribe the method by which the election should be conducted.
[B]3. Does RCV violate the gubinatorial tie breaker rule?[/B]
This is statistically almost impossible, but even so RCV would have to be read as containing an implicit exception should such a conflict arise.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
