The San Jose Mercury News has this op-ed, by Rob Richie and Devin McCarthy, advocating that U.S. House elections provide for multi-member districts, combined with Ranked Choice Voting. The most startling fact in the op-ed is that with our current system, the Republicans could keep a majority in the U.S. House even if the Republicans only receive 45% of the two-party vote cast for U.S. House nationwide. The suggested reform would almost certainly mean that the party that receives the most votes nationwide for U.S. House would be the party that organizes the U.S. House.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
Mr. Richie has been writing the same old stuff for about 20 years.
Exact P.R. — pre-election candidate rank order lists.
Winners have a voting power in the legislative body equal to the final votes received.
Both majority rule and minority representation.
The gerrymander CRISIS is N-O-W.
That doesn’t make Richie wrong.
I could support this. It would be a refreshing change from the current gerrymandered mess we have at the moment.
It would probably be preferable that California be divided into 9 Super-Districts of 5 (vote for no more than 3) or 7 (vote for no more than 4) member seats. Also permit up to THREE 6 (vote for no more than 4) member seats. Obviously, at least ONE 6 member seat would be needed when California’s delegation was an even number in the future. I would oppose 3 member seats as it’s likely that minor party/Independent candidates would still have very little chance of winning. Five to seven would give them a much greater chance of victory, especially if votes were counted as even for each candidate.