In recent U.S. election we see concrete example of how U.S. does not use strictly FPTP in this election.
and we see that the alternative they use in this case (two-round runoff) creates undue excitement and is no more fair than FPTP.
No candidate in Georgia's Senate race got majority of votes so on Dec. 6 that seat will be decided by a run-off election as per Georgia law.
Its adoption of two-round voting is result of the risk of almost random results under FPTP.
A recent article* says this: "Georgia’s runoff law was created in the 1960s as a way to preserve white political power in a majority-white state and diminish the influence of Black politicians who could more easily win in a multicandidate race with a plurality of the vote, according to a report by the U.S. Interior Department." I *Georgia Senate Runoff: How It Works and Why It Is Important - The New York Times (nytimes.com) with a minority of votes being enough to take a seat under FPTP, influential elements of Georgia's whites were worried about minority (blacks) taking a Senator seat in the state, and brought in system that would ensure no bad effect from vote splitting among the white voters. So now with the balance of power in the Senate perhaps to rest on outcome of Georgia's seat, we will see both major parties pour money, workers, propaganda and promises, etc. into that small state for next four weeks. and majority that will be used to determine seat will be in many cases different voters than in the first election. and the 2 percent who voted for the Libertarian candidate -- if they vote - must vote for one of the two major parties. fewer candidates different voters almost a whole new election. If voters had only ranked their ballots, in the November vote, election officials could have simply looked at back-up preferences of the Libertarian candidate and assessed who had majority support of first preferences of the two front runners and second preferences of that candidate. That country would be spared this excitement that will surely deepen the divide that polarizes the country. Georgia has a system that is majoritarian (the best you can do in a one-seat district) but its mechanism is no more calming than FPTP and takes more time than IRV would do. Georgia, like all states, actually has two senators so could have multi-seat contest where seats are allocated to the two largest groups, thus creating balance and fairness and majority representation of a different sort,
but currently the two Senators are elected in staggered terms, preventing such balance.
================================
other info on this subject:
the staggered terms are actually not prescribed in the U.S. Constitution
The constitution said to divide up senators so that a third are elected every two years.
But that does not mean the election of senators in each state will be staggered.
The country could instead have chosen to have a third of the states elect both of their senators simultaneously, That would also have allowed one third of the Senators to be elected each time. while allowing the senators to be elected in two-seat contest.
===================
Comments