There is ongoing litigation in New Jersey attempting to overturn the state’s ban on fusion voting.
Thanks to electionlawblog.org for letting us know about the column, which is linked below.
There is ongoing litigation in New Jersey attempting to overturn the state’s ban on fusion voting.
Thanks to electionlawblog.org for letting us know about the column, which is linked below.
Will fusion voting create unlimited power?
ONLY THE POWER TO CORRUPT ABSOLUTELY ???
SEE LORD ACTON QUOTE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion
FOR SCIENCE FANS
Does the author of this article understand that slaves were counted as 3/5ths because that made LOWER population totals for the south resulting in them having FEWER seats in the house? It was in fact the NORTH that didn’t want slaves counted at all.
And the senate is supposed to be the representation of the state governments not the people; so it makes no sense to allocate seats by population. In fact, the federal constitution is an agreement between the states and the federal government. The federal government is supposed to be nothing but an open migration, economic, and mutual defense agreement. In other words, they could have just had a senate and no house; but the founder’s wanted a popular check on state power at the federal level.
It is absurd to distribute seats based on population since the senate is meant to represent state governments, not the general public. The federal constitution is actually a contract between the federal government and the states. All that the federal government is meant to be is an open agreement on immigration, economics, and mutual defense. Stated differently, the founding fathers desired a popular check on state power at the federal level, so they could have gotten by with just a senate and no house.
That would actually be a good move.
Also, I’m for fission voting.
THE STATES WILL SURVIVE WITH PR AND REAL DEMOCRACY IN ALL REGIMES —
FED / STATES / LOCALS
—
P-A-T
The case for fusion is built on the associational rights of political parties. Every party has the right to nominate whomever it wants, even if it is the candidate of another party.
This wasn’t a problem prior to state printed ballots. Since each party printed its own ballots, there was nothing to prohibit them from placing a name of a candidate on their ballots who might happen also happen to be the nominee of another party.
Today, the legal basis for fusion can be derived from the Eu v San Francisco decision, since that ruling expressly recognized that parties are voluntary associations with the rights of self governance.
No problem under Max plan – winning party chooses officeholders.
Real democracy is Bolshevik insanity. A lynch mob is the purest democracy.
HOW MUCH DEATH AND DESTRUCTION AND SLAVERY IN 6,000 YEARS VIA
MONARCH/OLIGARCH REGIMES ???
VS
REAL DEMOCRACY REGIMES ???
—
P-A-T
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/nation/2023/11/17/biden-impeachment-letter-white-house/71624555007/
WHICH GANG IS SUBVERTING THE SYSTEM THE EVIL WORST/BEST ???
COMMIE BIDEN GANG OR FASCIST TRUMP GANG ???
@WZ,
When there were not government printed ballots there was no way go to determine the party supported by the voter. A voter might have used a ballot printed in a newspaper, or simply made his own. Even if he used a party ballot he was free to edit it.
In the Breckenridge-Douglas fusion tickets in 1860 the two factions of the Democratic Party shared a single ballot, though in some counties one faction might control the printing press and modify it to their favor.
The party line is a modern contrivance.
“Real democracy regimes” have killed a lot more people a lot quicker.
The fascist Biden gang is evil and subverting America. Trump and Trump patriots are saving America.
Here’s how to take the government’s shitty argument about “legitimate state interest” and stuff it back in its mouth:
Without fusion, third party candidates are forced to nominate someone else. The threat of spoiling causes Voter Confusion. Actual spoiling reduces Stability.
Governments react by restricting ballot access. This results in a two-party system where power swings back and forth. But this is still Unstable, and leads either to single-party monopoly, which can later break apart, or an unholy cartel with two faces. This is no longer a republic.
With fusion, candidates feel political pressure to get cross-nominations from third parties. This eliminates the spoiler effect, which reduces Voter Confusion and increases Stability.
AZ:
List of real democracy regimes? Is USA currently a real democracy regime? At what times in history has it been one, and what times not?
@AC,
Without government-recognized parties and nominations, political organizations could act cooperatively in support of individual candidates.
You keep bringing that up, then asking for explanation of why that would help the biggest parties/factions and most well known, well financed, well connected candidates. Once that explanation is provided you ask for why that would be a bad thing. Once that explanation is also provided you don’t respond, and then it’s back to square one in discussion on a subsequent article, like here.
@CKF,
Do you really believe the current system is designed to give small factions who are underfunded and not well connected candidates a chance?
Relative to what you propose, yes.
@CKF,
If it was by design, who were the designers?
There’s no simple answer to that which I know of. I do know that your proposals would tilt the playing field further in the direction of concentrating political power for reasons we’ve discussed previously.