Difference between revisions of "Electoral and Campaign Finance Reform"

From CA Greens wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Existing text from GPCA platform)
 
(Electoral Reform first draft)
 
(26 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
Democracy refers as much to a lively political culture as to a system of government. A diverse society needs a pluralistic structure to allow the widest possible range of people to have their voices heard. To truly enfranchise citizens, we must ensure that everyone has their say.
+
Democracy refers as much to a lively political culture as to a system of government. A diverse society needs a pluralistic structure to allow the widest possible range of views to heard. To truly enfranchise citizens, everyone must have the right and the ability to their say.  
  
−
In the ten years from 1990 to 2000, the average turnout of eligible voters in Presidential election years was 53%, and in non-Presidential elections years it was 43%. This means, in a two-way, winner-take-all race, the winning candidate for a state-level office needed only an average of 27% of the eligible voters to win (53% x 50.1%) in a Presidential election year, and only 22% (43% x 50.1%) in a non-Presidential election year. It is difficult to believe that elections where so few participate or vote for winning candidates can be considered legitimate or representative.
+
The United States has one of the lowest voter turnouts among established democracies. In a healthy democracy, high voter turnout results from the ability of voters to cast votes to elect candidates who reflect their views. By contrast, the U.S. single-seat, winner-take-all electoral system greatly limits voter choice and representation -- a disincentive to vote -- especially when combined with campaign finance laws that give disproportionate influence to big money. Many who do vote, go to the polls primarily to vote for what they are against. California's failed top two experiment has only made this worse, limiting voters to only two choices in the general election, and making primary ballot access more difficult. This reduction in choice has led to historically low voter turnout. When few eligible voters participate and elect our representatives, the legitimacy and representative nature of our democracy is diminished.  
−
+
 
−
Additionally, the effects of the decennial redistricting process and partisan / incumbent gerrymandering produce insidious distortions of democracy. A study by the non-partisan Center for Voting and Democracy showed that redistricting turned 80% of congressional districts into non-competitive, one-party bastions where voters had little choice but to ratify the candidate of the major party that controlled that district. This accounts for the large-margin victories we so often see. In California, 42 out of 52 congressional districts are won by 10 point margins or higher; 35 out of 52 by landslides of 20 points or higher. In effect, politicians are choosing the voters before the voters are allowed to choose them.
+
Much electoral reform debate focuses upon who should draw districts lines, and how to make district elections competitive. But competitive districts don't mean representative elections, and single-seat, winner-take-all district elections are not capable of representing the diversity of California voters.
−
+
 
−
This reality also impacts campaign finance reform. Campaign contributors are simply responding to high incumbent re-election rates, more than causing them. Most big donors seek to buy influence, not elections. Minor parties lose elections not because of inequity in campaign contributions, they lose because they are a minority viewpoint within a majoritarian system. In a general election, the underlying partisan views of a district's voters are far more decisive than campaign spending. "Demography is destiny..."because gerrymandered districts creates such a large majority of a particular viewpoint.
+
Greens support the use of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for the state legislature, and ranked-choice voting for statewide executive office. Greens also support a larger legislature, which will allow for results to be more proportional.  
−
+
 
−
Money plays a larger role in primary elections where voters are not choosing between parties, and candidates with more money can distinguish themselves from the pack. Thus, campaign finance reform can be more effective in primary elections, as well as in single-seat state-wide elections and municipal at-large elections.
+
California currently has by far the lowest per-capita state representation in the United States (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_U.S._state_governments). The number of seats in the California state legislature was set in 1879 when California's statewide population was approximately 865,000 (http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/state_census_data_center/historical_census_1850-2010/documents/2010-1850_STCO_IncCities-FINAL.xls). Today that many people live within a single State Senate District and are represented by a single State Senator, and the state population is over 39 million -- yet the number of seats has never been increased (as of 2016 http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-1/documents/E-1_2016PressRelease.pdf).  
−
+
 
−
The Green Party therefore proposes basic changes in the electoral system:
+
'''Proposals:''' The Green Party proposes:
−
+
 
−
Public financing of elections and free media access to level the playing field for getting candidates' messages to voters.
+
'''Voting Systems'''
−
+
 
−
Reject the notion that money in political campaigns is free speech, as interpreted by the Supreme Court decision in Buckley vs. Vallejo.
+
- Enact a system of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for the California state legislature, and ranked choice voting for single-seat executive office. (www.cagreens.org/platform/proportional-representation
−
+
 
−
Hold elections on non-working days. Saturdays and Sundays are the worldwide day of choice. Holidays, such as Veterans Day, should also be considered.
+
- Increase the number of seats in the state legislature.
−
+
 
−
Take the redistricting process away from politicians and place it under the control of elected citizen boards that represent the various partisan, civic and minority constituencies. Criteria for drawing the boundaries should be developed to make all legislative districts as competitive as possible.
+
- Abolish the Top Two system for state and federal elections
−
+
 
−
The Green Party will strive to run candidates reflecting the diversity of the larger culture.
+
'''Election Dates'''
−
+
 
−
Combine voluntary campaign spending limits and public campaign funding to reduce money's corrupting influence on our political system.
+
- Make the June primary election and the November general election state democracy holidays
−
+
 
−
Allow eligible candidates to pay postage rates one quarter of the regular rate, as well as free access to the airwaves.
+
'''Voter Registration'''
−
+
 
−
Establish contribution limits for Political Action Committees (PACs) with less than 50 members to prevent wealthy people from using their funds to unduly influence elections.
+
- Enact same day voter registration
−
+
 
−
Prohibit political parties from using "soft money" - transfers from other campaigns or party coffers - to pay for any election-related activities.
+
- Lower the voter registration age to 16, with automatic voter registration via the public schools(http://www.fairvote.org/lower_the_voting_age#why_should_we_lower_the_voting_age_to_16)
−
+
 
−
Other electoral reforms deserving our support in varying degrees are:
+
- Enact Permanent Portable Voter Registration, so that once an eligible citizen is on a state‘s voter rolls, they remain registered and their records move with them so long as they continue to reside in that state.
−
+
 
−
Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)
+
'''Ballot Access'''
−
+
 
−
IRV is an important reform for single-seat races such as mayor, governor, Congress and state legislatures. IRV allows voters to rank their choices first, second, third, etc., and operates like a series of runoff elections. If a voter's first choice doesn't win, their vote transfers to their second choice, and so on. IRV allows voters to vote their conscience without "wasting" their vote on a candidate not likely to win, or being forced in to choosing between the "lesser of two evils."
+
- Lower the signature and fee requirements for state and federal candidates to get on the ballot in the primaries.
−
+
 
−
None of the Above (NOTA)
+
- Offer full candidate statements in county and state voter guides at minimal costs for all ballot-qualified candidates
−
+
 
−
NOTA can be effective in party primaries. If none of the candidates seeking the party's nomination are satisfactory, party members can vote NOTA. If NOTA wins, no candidate advances to the general election. In a general election NOTA can have mixed results. NOTA would allow voters to express their dissatisfaction with all available candidates. However, a vote for NOTA takes away the "protest votes" that would otherwise go to minor party candidates. This perpetuates the two-party monopoly by increasing their share of the total candidate-votes, further reducing the share received by minor party candidates. Also, NOTA could force a second, expensive election where the party with the most money would likely prevail.
+
- Restore the right to general election write-in candidacies for state and federal office
−
+
 
−
Fusion
+
'''Voting System Integrity'''
−
+
 
−
Under fusion, one party can endorse another party's candidate. That candidate then appears on the ballot of all parties endorsing her or him. In winner-take-all systems, fusion can help smaller parties by allowing them to unite around a single candidate and combine their strength. However, a minor party could lose its independence by fusing with a major party candidate, thus failing to provide an alternative to the major parties.
+
- Make voting systems secure, reliable and verifiable
 +
 
 +
- Open source code for elections, not proprietary

Latest revision as of 00:01, 5 June 2016

Democracy refers as much to a lively political culture as to a system of government. A diverse society needs a pluralistic structure to allow the widest possible range of views to heard. To truly enfranchise citizens, everyone must have the right and the ability to their say.

The United States has one of the lowest voter turnouts among established democracies. In a healthy democracy, high voter turnout results from the ability of voters to cast votes to elect candidates who reflect their views. By contrast, the U.S. single-seat, winner-take-all electoral system greatly limits voter choice and representation -- a disincentive to vote -- especially when combined with campaign finance laws that give disproportionate influence to big money. Many who do vote, go to the polls primarily to vote for what they are against. California's failed top two experiment has only made this worse, limiting voters to only two choices in the general election, and making primary ballot access more difficult. This reduction in choice has led to historically low voter turnout. When few eligible voters participate and elect our representatives, the legitimacy and representative nature of our democracy is diminished.

Much electoral reform debate focuses upon who should draw districts lines, and how to make district elections competitive. But competitive districts don't mean representative elections, and single-seat, winner-take-all district elections are not capable of representing the diversity of California voters.

Greens support the use of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for the state legislature, and ranked-choice voting for statewide executive office. Greens also support a larger legislature, which will allow for results to be more proportional.

California currently has by far the lowest per-capita state representation in the United States (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_U.S._state_governments). The number of seats in the California state legislature was set in 1879 when California's statewide population was approximately 865,000 (http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/state_census_data_center/historical_census_1850-2010/documents/2010-1850_STCO_IncCities-FINAL.xls). Today that many people live within a single State Senate District and are represented by a single State Senator, and the state population is over 39 million -- yet the number of seats has never been increased (as of 2016 http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-1/documents/E-1_2016PressRelease.pdf).

Proposals: The Green Party proposes:

Voting Systems

- Enact a system of multi-seat districts with proportional representation for the California state legislature, and ranked choice voting for single-seat executive office. (www.cagreens.org/platform/proportional-representation

- Increase the number of seats in the state legislature.

- Abolish the Top Two system for state and federal elections

Election Dates

- Make the June primary election and the November general election state democracy holidays

Voter Registration

- Enact same day voter registration

- Lower the voter registration age to 16, with automatic voter registration via the public schools(http://www.fairvote.org/lower_the_voting_age#why_should_we_lower_the_voting_age_to_16)

- Enact Permanent Portable Voter Registration, so that once an eligible citizen is on a state‘s voter rolls, they remain registered and their records move with them so long as they continue to reside in that state.

Ballot Access

- Lower the signature and fee requirements for state and federal candidates to get on the ballot in the primaries.

- Offer full candidate statements in county and state voter guides at minimal costs for all ballot-qualified candidates

- Restore the right to general election write-in candidacies for state and federal office

Voting System Integrity

- Make voting systems secure, reliable and verifiable

- Open source code for elections, not proprietary

Retrieved from "http://wiki.cagreens.org/index.php?title=Electoral_and_Campaign_Finance_Reform&oldid=3621"