Friday, October 4, 2013

Election Reform Amendment to the US Constitution

So obviously I'm not much of a blogger.  The whole law school thing makes it difficult to keep up with anything else right now.  But I thought I would post this assignment from my Con Law Seminar class:

The Election Reform Amendment
Amendment XXVIII

Section 1. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of 100 Senators, chosen by the citizens of the United States in a national election, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one vote.  Senate seats will no longer be associated with a State, so the “equal Suffrage” provision in Article V is hereby repealed.  The national election for choosing Senators shall be an Open List Proportional Representation election, whereby the citizens of the United States shall vote for one of several political parties.  Each political party shall provide its voters with a list of candidates for Senate seats, and each citizen shall rank the candidates in order of preference (i.e. first, second, third, etc.).  In order to appear on the printed Senate ballot, a party must either have received at least two percent (2%) of the vote in the prior Senate election or be currently polling at two percent (2%) or above in any Senate poll approved by the Federal Election Commission.  Voters may write in a party that does not appear on the printed ballot and may also write in and rank individual candidates for that party.  Political parties shall receive Senate seats based on the percentage of votes received; winning one percent of the vote shall result in one Senate seat.  The political parties must select the candidates to serve as Senators based on the wishes of voters as expressed by preferential rankings.  After subtracting whole percentage points, political parties with percentage points between one-tenth (.1%) and nine-tenths (.9%) shall negotiate and compromise with other parties to select Senators by pooling parts of whole percentage points to make a whole percentage point.  Any percentage point over nine-tenths (.9%) shall be deemed a whole percentage point.  Any percentage point under one-tenth (.1%) shall be deemed zero percentage points.

Section 2. The President of the United States shall be elected by the citizens of the United States in a nationwide election utilizing Instant Runoff Voting every four years.  Voters shall rank Presidential candidates in order of preference (i.e. first, second, third, etc.).  The first choices of all voters will be tabulated first.  If one Presidential candidate receives a majority of first choice votes, then that candidate shall become the President of the United States.  If no candidate receives a majority of first choice votes, then a runoff tabulation will occur.  In this runoff, the candidate who received the least amount of first choice votes will be eliminated.  Then all ballots will be retabulated, with the highest-ranked candidate still in the race receiving one vote per ballot.  If one candidate receives a majority of these votes, then that candidate shall become the President of the United States.  If no candidate receives a majority of these votes, then another runoff tabulation will occur.  Again the candidate who received the least amount of first choice votes among the remaining candidates will be eliminated and the ballots retabulated, with the highest-ranked remaining candidates receiving one vote per ballot.  This process of elimination and retabulation shall continue until one candidate receives a majority of the votes.  The printed national ballot for the Presidential Election shall include the names of all candidates nominated by a political party that received at least two percent (2%) of the first choice votes in the first tabulation of the previous Presidential Election and the names of all candidates currently polling at two percent (2%) or above in any Presidential poll approved by the Federal Election Commission.  Any candidate whose name will be printed on the national ballot for the Presidential Election must choose a person to run as that candidate’s choice for Vice-President.  Voters may also write-in candidates of their choice for President and Vice-President.  The Electoral College is hereby abolished.

Section 3.  The States shall remain responsible for choosing Members to serve on the House of Representatives.  Elections for Members of the House of Representatives shall continue to occur every other year.  The method for electing Members of the House of Representatives shall be chosen by the individual States.  States may use a winner-take-all system, an Instant Runoff Voting system, a Proportional Representation system, or other system as the individual States decide.


Explanation and Introduction of the Election Reform Amendment

            The United States of America was among the first of modern nations to experiment with a democratically elected Republican government.  This accomplishment is worthy of celebration.  However such celebration should not blind us to more recent innovations in the democratic experiment.  The winner-take-all plurality system currently used in most of the United States encourages the polarized two-party system that we currently have. 
In Federalist Paper #10, James Madison said, “Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens.”  The factionalism that some of the founders were worried about has become a problem in modern American politics.  Today the United States effectively has a two-party system.  Two factions can not possibly represent the variety of opinions found in the United States today.  Also the two-party system has begun to produce extremist victors in the party primary elections, resulting in less moderates being elected to office.  The fact that fewer moderates have been elected means that there is often less willingness for the two parties to work together and negotiate settlements.  Instead members of these two parties do things like pass controversial legislation without any votes from the other party or refuse to fund the implementation of such controversial legislation, preferring instead to allow a shutdown of the federal government.  Such impasse could be avoided if the United States government consisted of representatives from various parties instead of just two.  Interesting coalitions around certain issues would result in more consensus and compromise and less division and gridlock. 
A Senate elected by proportional representation would ensure that people who are underrepresented now would have some representation in the national government.  Also the elimination of State by State interests in one body of legislature could make it less likely that the Air Force would continue to receive unwanted fighter jets just because the jets are manufactured in the state of a certain Senator who happens to receive generous contributions from the military contractor and union that manufacture such unwanted fighter jets.
Electing the President by Instant Runoff Voting would allow voters to pick their favorite candidate without worries that they are “throwing away” their vote and allowing their least favorite candidate to win.  This would also save certain people, such as consumer advocate lawyers or former Nixon aides, from being vilified by the mainstream media as “turncoats” who are helping the “other guy” win.  To reference an episode of one popular television show, Americans would no longer be forced to choose between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

            The House of Representatives would also benefit from similar election reform.  But since the House would essentially become the only body where representatives were selected by region, it seems most fitting to allow states to choose their own method of electing representatives.  Hopefully this Amendment would encourage states to investigate and possibly adopt such election reforms as Instant Runoff Voting or Proportional representation.  But states should be free to decide this.  Other systems, such as the one implemented in California by Proposition 14 in 2010, could achieve the same goals of depolarization and favoring moderates through other means.

No comments:

Post a Comment