Intelligence Squared is a forum that gathers together experts to debate public policy, every month. The moderator is usually John Donvan, an ABC News correspondent who was once ABC’s White House Correspondent. The debates are held in New York city and can be heard on National Public Radio and seen on Bloomberg TV. Also they can be seen at www.iq2oz.com, and are archived there.
The February 15 debate is titled “The Two-Party System is Making America Ungovernable.” Speaking in the affirmative are David Brooks, columnist for the New York Times, and Arianna Huffington, founder of the Huffington Post. Speaking in the negative are author Zev Chafets and satirist P. J. O’Rourke. Attendance costs $40, and the debate runs from 6:45 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. The location is NYU Skirball Center, 566 LaGuardia Place at Washington Square South, Manhattan. Thanks to Michael Edelstein for this news.
Any of the genius folks on the show ever heard about gerrymanders and proportional representation — or are they the standard on the streets MORONS on the Jay Leno show ???
On Feb. 12, 2011 we are holding a National Conference of Independents at the same location. The title of the conference is “Can Independents Reform America” and we expect around 700 activists from over 38 states. Anyone interested go to http://www.independentvoting.org.
Use this link: http://ipview.blogspot.com/ to listen Jacqueline Salit, President of IndependentVoting.org and sponser of the conference.
Mike, I’m glad you posted something. Can you tell me the definition of “independent” that IndependentVoting uses? I have asked 7 leaders of IndependentVoting to define the word “independent”, and they have all refused. I hope you can try your hand at it.
The reason I ask is that, first, I want to find out if “independent” means that the person has centrist views or may have any political views. Second, in the states that have registration by party, does “independent” mean someone who is a registered independent? Finally, does the word “independent” include members of minor parties? Thank you very much.
This is my opinion. Because NY is a strong two party state with closed primaries, we do count minor parties, and independents or “Blank” as the state counts them. Adding these together the total active independent voters would be around 2,708,752.
I considered myself as an independent, someone who does not believe we should vote for a party but the candidate so would register to vote in no party. In NY, I consider The Independence Party more of a movement to affect candidates decisions because of Fusion. I agree some voters selected the party in NY instead of the official Blank. But after our phone bank outreach, Politics for the People classes, and other outreach efforts, many stayed with the party. Over 4,000 of them partitioned and were elected to County Committees in the 5 boroughs of New York City.
An Independent has many different views on the issues: left, right, and center. The problem I think you are addressing is a problem of the states handling of their voters and the bad political structure we currently have. The actions of the voters is being determined by each states’ ballot access process and the desire of voters to figure out how the take part and have a voice.
Thanks, Mike. I have heard that former California Lieutenant Governor Abel Maldonado is on Independent Voting’s panel next month. He is a registered Republican. Does IndependentVoting consider Maldonado to be an independent?
Does Independent Voting favor non-partisan elections for all office? Does Independent Voting think party labels should be on ballots? Nancy Hanks’ blog has a quote from George Washington saying political parties are bad. Does Independent Voting desire that people stop participating in political parties? Would the world be better off if there were no political parties?
It is the MUSH HEAD circa 10 percent of the voters (aka *independents*) who cause the various *landslide* victories for the party hacks in the marginal gerrymander areas.
See the recent 52 percent Prezs claiming 100 percent mandates from Hell for their party hack control freak agendas.
6000 plus years —
MORE govt.
LESS govt.
NO change govt ???
As to parties in regimes — see Federalist No. 10 — NOTHING new and different since 1787-1788 — except much more left/right STATISM in the U.S.A. — and U.S.A. national bankruptcy due to 1929-2011 deficits.
The Open Primary issue has two elements to look at:
Who Pays-We are starting to hear this issue from Alaska to NY. If we can not vote in a closed party selection system why does all the state voters have to pay for the running of these closed systems? Isn’t that “Taxation without Representation”?
Comments from independents:
“If one-third of the voters are neither Republicans nor Democrats, then why does the state of Tennessee pay for party primaries to pick party nominees?”
“In some 39 states with presidential primaries, taxpayers pay out millions to run a vote that helps the two major parties select their nominees.”
“Why should government pay for partisan primary elections? Political parties are private organizations, like the AARP or NRA or most big corporations. Such groups conduct leadership elections on their own. Why shouldn’t political parties do the same? On the flip side, why should unaffiliated voters — a big majority — be forced to fork over millions to nominate candidates in what may be a skewed system? Perhaps they shouldn’t. Political parties have every right to make their own rules and govern their own affairs. They have every right to select candidates any way they like. They can raise funds and spend. But why should all the taxpayers be forced to pay?”
“If these are IN FACT party elections or caucuses, why is the taxpayer in my home state of Idaho (and yours?) paying for them? If Independents cannot vote in them (as is a partial focus of the Idaho case) why then should those citizens pay for the costs of those party elections? Also, since a Party is a corporation and certain new rights have recently been accorded to corporations by the US Supreme Court, how can a Party expect to nominate from among its members, candidates, and expect the taxpayer to foot the bill?”
How it is Run-To create a system to answer all the Supreme Court issues, I would create a system with these features:
1. All Candidates selected by their parties paid for system, ballot accepted new minor party candidates, independents, and write-ins are on one ballot.
2. There is two boxes. One optionally indicates the Candidates registered party. The other optionally indicates all endorsements.
3. The Top Two go on to the General Election.
A possible additional element could be IRV. This would allow the first selection of a favorite son or daughter, vanity candidate, etc. and also reduce the cost of running the primary.
We would want non-partisan/open primaries for local and state elections. I think we want all voters, major or minor parties, and independents to take part in the political process.
I think any elected official or candidate that thinks independently and makes decisions to prove it, is an independent.
Thanks, Mike, for defining “independent” in terms of candidates and elected officials. But what is the definition of an independent voter? Is it based on beliefs, or on registration, or something else?
# 9 A brain defect unable to detect left or right ??? — as in LEFT Donkey or RIGHT Elephant ???
I would consider myself as an independent voter because I vote for candidates that I agree with on their stated position on issues, not because they belong to a particular major or minor party or they are an independent.
I was registered in no party since 1965 but as I stated in #5, when I returned to NYC in 2000, I registered in the Independence Party to expand my activistism with a movement of left, right, center, and a mix of ethinicities, to use fusion which is the tool the state gave us to not swing to but sway candidates as independents.
The link in the article is for the group in Australia. This is the link to the US group:
http://intelligencesquaredus.org/