On October 28, John Arnold contributed yet another $1,000,000 to the campaign to pass the top-two initiative in Oregon, and former New York city Mayor Michael Bloomberg contributed another $280,000. This means the two of them, together, have contributed $4,680,000. Arnold lives in Texas and of course, Bloomberg lives in New York.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
Will they get together and move around to each State NOT having top 2 but having voter const amdt petitions ???
Stay tuned.
Any big donors in the 1880s-1890s who helped pay for the now dying official party hack primaries ???
—
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
NO primaries.
One would think the people of Oregon – whether liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican – and all others – would reject Top Two simply on the principal of so many “out of state” people putting money on the “YES” side of this issue.
Richard, do you have any knowledge of how much is being spent against this issue?
It is looking more and more like Oregon is going to fall under Top Two Tyranny. The Vote Yes side is burying the Vote No side in terms of money.
Unfortunately true.
They probably would vote against it on this basis if they only knew about that, but few of them do.
A new world-wide political unity, an International Parliament
elected under pure proportional representation (PR) from
worldwide voting, has emerged by electing a Unity Cabinet.
This new team which can challenge the established political
status quo by being better team players on a global scale,
has emerged after twenty years of organizing efforts
while being part of the inspiration for political candidates,
Occupy Wall Street, Arab Spring and the naming of
the multi-billion dollar gateway Google Inc.
The International Parliament has elected a Cabinet and
is extending an invitation to all world citizens who may
be inclined to participate and unite for truly representative
government:
http://www.international-parliament.org/cabinet.html
The new Cabinet is able to coordinate by voting and thinking
as part of a global team which is subject to accountability with
torque. Unlike the United Nations where the five-member Security
Council has veto power, the ten International Parliament’s Executives
are subject to a 365-day a year “vote of confidence”.
* * *
Oregon was the first State to have voter initiatives and now has a P.R. section in the OR Const. —
and is 1 of the very few 2 party States at the moment.
OR also has ALL paper mail ballots – NO polling places.
Thus will Oregon liberate the rest of the USA ???
—
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
There is some social science research that shows that whereas heavy spending by just one side can typically defeat an initiative, the reverse isn’t necessarily true. Heavy spending by the “yes” side is not as effective as heavy spending by the “no” side.
James Ogle: Are you a supporter of Top Two? From the little parlor game you want us to play called USParliament, it reeks of one world government, and internationalism to the core. Am I correct?
Paulie: Still waiting to hear back from you regarding getting the Libertarians, the Constitution(al)ists, and populist Independents in Alabama to join together under a neutral 3rd party label to obtain ballot position for 2018.
Such is the only way we will get on the ballot. I do not believe either the Libertarian Party or the Constitution(al) Party alone can gather the some 50,000 plus signatures which will be necessary.
The Greens might be able to get on the ballot on their own, therefore, I would not necessarily be interested in inviting them to such a cooperation. I fear they would dominate such activity. Could be wrong about the Greens, but I feel they have less in common with us, than do the Libertarians and the Constitution(al)ists.
One of the reasons that Top Two passed in California in 2010 is because the Vote Yes side spent a lot more money than the Vote No side.
“Alabama Independent
October 30, 2014 at 1:58 pm
Paulie: Still waiting to hear back from you regarding getting the Libertarians, the Constitution(al)ists, and populist Independents in Alabama to join together under a neutral 3rd party label to obtain ballot position for 2018.”
I do not see this happening. There are too many differences between these parties for this to work out.
Then that must be the justification to be against unity and free speech; social science research says spend big time against unity and free speech and it pays off.
The South Super-state Parliament, consisting of seven states which includes Alabama, has identified great team players and we have the best way to unite with the all.
We’ve been doing it for 19 consecutive years and it works great.
Let us know when you’d like to connect:
http://www.usparliament.org/ss6.php
I attended Indian Springs High School for two years and HP chairman (and California GOP Gov candidate in 2000) Meg Whitman’s husband and his brother Carter Harsh are both brain surgeons and they both also attended Springs too.
Thank you for asking. No I am not a supporter of top two.
As far as a one world government, I do favor decision-making for all elections, whether it’s the earth as a whole, individual countries, states and virtually any election system you can name including elections for the Pope, as a peaceful and orderly decision-making alternative to force and violence.
Meant to write, voting as a peaceful decision-making alternative to force and violence, on an international (and galactic) level. Proportional representation for aliens too, you know. 🙂
A “party” is a word by a person’s name and individual cool team players exist in all parties. You just need a way to identify the differences between cool team players and dictators.
If they play by the rules of the most perfect system known then they can play the correct rules of the game for good team players.
“Party chairmen” are usually the dictator types because they are elected to single-winner seats and they think that works fine. Single winner districts aren’t a team.
The meanest power grabbers, egotists (i.e. Obama) and control freaks are attracted to those kinds of elections and so the party chairmen are usually the worse types of personalities.
James Ogle: Happy to learn you are not for Top Two. But you are vague with answer to my question of does the USParliament promotes one world government, and internationalism?
I believe all nations should voluntarily cooperate with one another, and all nations should allow its people to decide who will lead its government. And, I personally would have no problem with a voluntary group of genuine “democratic” nations, joining together militarily and forcing totalitarian regimes to allow their people to be free and have an open “democratic” electoral process in addition to having freedom of religion and from oppression.
And once such is accomplished, each government involved should return to governing itself, minding its own business, and remain independent, with out interference of any so-called world government.
Up until 1945 – or whatever year the United Nations was founded – the United States operated as above. Today, we join a throng of other nations in the Tower of Babble at the United Nations and ‘talk, talk, talk, and nothing but talk, talk, talk, while millions of people in North Korea and a number of people of other nations are victims of oppression and all kinds of atrocities.
Where are the Teddy Roosevelts when we need them?
James Ogle:
I might be interested in “connecting” as long as my independence is assured and maintained, and would not be bound by any decision of the so-called “South-Super-state Parliament.”
But again, as I’ve asked you before, what does the USParliament actually do? Do you just sit around and exchange emails, or do you really do something to end voter discrimination against 3rd parties and Independents?
Answer these questions, and then I’ll make a decision.
To clarify, after seeing it work I do like Top Two better than what we had before in California.
I would never try to invest in implementing Top Two because I know pure proportional representation (PR) is a thousand times better and that’s where I invest.
I also wouldn’t invest in stopping Top Two in open primaries if it were replacing closed primaries. There are many forms of voting and I only support one; The Sainte-Lague parliament seat distribution system, ranked choice voting, Hagenbach-Bischoff method in multi-winner districts of two or more.
My vision of a world democratic entity is one where people can vote on decisions on a world level based on the principle 50% plus one vote is a simple majority.
Being able to make decisions on a world level would be good for moving forward to help effect positive change.
Most people are turned off on democracy because of plurality elections in single-winner districts which suppress participation and often give the opposite results of what the majority wants because of the split vote problem. By having more choices then a smaller plurality wins (i.e. a vote count where 30% voted Ds, 30% voted Rs and 40% voted Independents means 60% lost and the 40% smaller plurality won).
Plurality elections are simple not accurate whatever you’re trying to accomplish you’d best start with a good foundation otherwise the majority won’t be happy and that’s how everything exists today throughout much of the world, especially the USA.
Alabama Independent, please phone or email me if you need better communication because this site isn’t dependable and isn’t allowing me to post answers as follow-ups to your questions and voice is better anyway.
Maybe it needs time to take effect, but there’s no “reply” link at the bottom of your recent comment. If the “reply” link comes up then I’ll try to use it.
The USA Parliament is both an election system and a voter registration drive.
Our paper ballots feature a standard federal voter registration form that is superior to most state voter registration forms because it asks ALL voters to write in the party/category instead of a special box for some categories but not others.
As far as decisions being made, decisions are made by the team under the principle of simple majority rule of the participants. If you’re for simple majority and agree that one vote breaks a 50/50 tie then you’ll like our decision-making system because we work well with large numbers of decision alternatives and name, and we never use yes/no type decision items or single-winner elections of names.
To organize in Alabama I would first set up a “Mini-State Parliament” in Alabama which hasn’t been done yet. Since there are seven states in the South Super-state Parliament (ss6) I would first conduct population demographics to determine if Alabama made up 1/12th of the South Super-State Parliament.
That’s because we use twelve super-states each containing twelve mini-states (and no state of county boundaries are breached when grouping states and counties) and then I would create an all new mini-state(s) for the Alabama region in which to work on the kind of entity we organize.
We always use five-member executives for each entity (three prime ministers and two secretaries) and it’s consistent on all levels unless custom rules are approved.
But we are very small and we don’t have every single person voting. For example in the South Super-state Parliament we may have about two people who are connected enough to vote on the guidelines and executives. But those two people are very involved. One lives in Tennessee and one in Louisiana.
So were we try to work together on a project us four would probably be the main people until more signed up.
The twelve super-states and 144 mini-states (12 x 12 = 144) are always designed to have as close to the same populations as possible.
Then every ten years when the USA’s census is completed, we adjust the groupings to reflect changes in population just as the US Constitution was designed.
http://www.usparliament.org
Andy:
It is strange conservatives and liberals in the GOP (admittedly there aren’t many liberals in the GOP) and conservatives and liberals in the Democratic Party (admittedly there aren’t many conservatives in the Democratic Party) usually find some way to “iron out” their differences and attempt to unify their tickets.
But you are so right about 3rd parties as a rule. It’s either cross your “t’s” and dot your “i’s” just like I do, or else I ain’t supporting the ticket.
And the major parties just smile all the way to the Bank.
True unity in the USA Parliament comes from the math and single-winner districts can’t do that.
Giving people the liberty to have a word(s) by their name brings inclusion. Then it’s a matter of numbers.
No matter when the data is small or large, when mathematicians and amateur mathematicians agree, the proof is in front of them and they have the same finite results from two identical sets of marked ballots, then that’s the where unity gets affirmed.
You’ll always have some people who say 1 + 1 doesn’t equal two, or 50% plus one isn’t a majority or they may never bother look at the math and just disagree regardless for no reason other than to be disagreeable.
The vast majority of the people can agree on some the simple basics and that how unity gets generated in elections.
In regards to Top Two, since single-winner elections is all most people are familiar with, it’s very easy to say it’s fair since one name gets more than 50% and one gets less.
To start a fight over that argument has been a big waste of time.
Top Two is just another version of instant runoff voting, but without rankings, just using “Xs”.
They are both single-winner elections systems which guarantee simple majority rule.
Fortunately, the 9th USA Parliament started as a 100-member district 1995 and it’s worked great ever since.
Now we’re going to become one national at-large 10,000-member district in 2016. This system works very well when people work together while single-winner districts encourage fights. (The two people in the high profile “death grip” get the most publicity and name recognition)
So why start a high-profile “death-grip” with top two when you could be working at unifying the whole?
All single-winner elections have winners and losers while pure proportional representation elects almost all winners. In a 10,000-member district, 99.98% plus 10,000 votes, are guaranteed to elect a representative.
Won’t you join us?
http://www.usparliament.org