[Summit] Summit Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4
Greg Gerritt
gerritt at mindspring.com
Fri Jun 6 12:37:06 UTC 2008
Computer programs to count these types of votes are pretty common and well
tested. Thr Green Party of the United States conducts on line ranked choice
votes (or instant runoff voting) and does it for single seat elections and
for multi seat elections. There are a variety of ways to do this that are
still truly proportional.
Greg gerritt
on 6/6/08 8:10 AM, Kate Sanders at katesndrs at yahoo.com wrote:
> In Cambridge, they have a system called "proportional
> voting" that's been in the news lately. The way it
> works in practice is that you write down an ordered
> list of your preferences for City Council:
>
> 1. Jane Smith
> 2. John Doe
> 3. etc.
>
> for as many names as you like to include. If your
> first choice doesn't win, your vote gets counted for
> your second choice, and if your second choice doesn't
> win, your vote counts for your third choice, etc.
>
> Still has the same disadvantage that it costs more to
> campaign city-wide. On the upside, as many people have
> pointed out,it takes away the argument that you're
> "throwing away your vote" on a candidate. You put your
> first choice first, and if they don't win, your vote
> is reassigned to your second choice. Moreover, your
> second choice knows where his or her votes came from.
> So Gore could have won, but with a block of votes that
> transferred from Nader (for example).
>
> Some advantages that I noticed while I was living in
> Cambridge, about 20 years ago now.
> (1) This strategy encourages candidates to run
> together, and to stress the issues they have in common
> rather than their personalities. That way, candidates
> can get spillover votes from their allies.
> (2) Local organizations such as the Summit
> Neighborhood Association would endorse a group of
> candidates, stressing the ideas they share and how
> those ideas would be beneficial.
> (3) New candidates get into the game more easily, by
> being introduced by more well-known candidates. ("If
> you like me, vote for this new person and make me your
> second choice.") And these alliances can be built
> around issues.
> (4) Although it would be easy enough to write a
> computer program to compute the votes, they always did
> it by hand, at least years ago when I lived there. It
> was quite a community event to go to the school gym
> and watch them counting the votes, and there was
> always a crowd there.
>
> Not sure how this would work here, but I'd prefer it
> to at-large representation.
>
> Kate
>
> --- summit-request at sna.providence.ri.us wrote:
>
>> Send Summit mailing list submissions to
>> summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
>> visit
>>
>>
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>>
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
>> 'help' to
>> summit-request at sna.providence.ri.us
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> summit-owner at sna.providence.ri.us
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
>> is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Summit digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: At large council proposal (Greg Gerritt)
>> 2. Re: At large council proposal
>> (e2shatter2 at cox.net)
>> 3. Re: At large council proposal
>> (libertyliterary at cox.net)
>> 4. Re: At large council proposal
>> (libertyliterary at cox.net)
>> 5. Re: At large council proposal
>> (libertyliterary at cox.net)
>>
>>
>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 18:07:08 -0400
>> From: Greg Gerritt <gerritt at mindspring.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Summit] At large council proposal
>> To: Jonathan Howard <jon at ceffect.com>, Summit
>> Neighborhood
>> <Summit at sna.providence.ri.us>, Stephen Durkee
>> <sdurkee at durkeebrown.com>
>> Message-ID: <C46DDBCC.2EBBA%gerritt at mindspring.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> This topic has come before me several times
>> recently. I talked to a
>> political scientist who?s specialty is race and
>> politics. He points out
>> that systems like this further maginalize the poor
>> and people of color in
>> cities like Providence. It favors the wealthiest
>> candidates. It works
>> better if it is a proportional system rather than a
>> first past the post
>> system, but it still tends to further discrimiantion
>> against the poor.
>>
>> It is another one of those things that good
>> government types like to offer,
>> which while seductive on the surface, tend to
>> reinforce the power of the
>> ruling elites. Greg gerritt
>>
>>
>> on 6/5/08 10:33 AM, Jonathan Howard at
>> jon at ceffect.com wrote:
>>
>>> Neighbors,
>>>
>>> A group called the 12+3 Coalition is proposing to
>> change the way our City
>>> Council is elected. Right now the city has 15
>> members, all from geographic
>>> wards (ours is Ward 3). Each Council member is
>> elected by the voters of one
>>> ward. The coalition proposes to reduce the number
>> of wards to 12 and make
>>> three of the seats elected on a citywide or
>> "at-large" basis.
>>>
>>> Steve Durkee, the Chairman of the City Plan
>> Commission and a leading architect
>>> has shared these talking points in favor of the
>> change. What do you all think
>>> of this idea? Is the current geographic system
>> working for you? Do you think
>>> that at-large council members would make the
>> council more responsive to the
>>> whole city?
>>>
>>> I don't know the specifics, but like all city
>> ordinances, this legislation
>>> will need committee hearings and approval before
>> going to the full City
>>> Council. Evidently this is likely to come up this
>> year.
>>>
>>> Jon Howard
>>>
>>> ps. Note that Summit Neighborhood Association has
>> not considered or endorsed
>>> this proposal. I am sending this to you for your
>> information and response.
>>>
>>>
>>> Let the People Decide!
>>>
>>> The Case for Reform of the Providence City Council
>>>
>>> The 12+3 Coalition is a diverse group of
>> Providence citizens seeking
>>> much-needed, fundamental reforms in the way our
>> city is governed.
>>>
>>> Our proposal simple: Change to City Council to
>> include 12 council members,
>>> each representing one ward ? and three at-large
>> council members, each
>>> representing the entire City.
>>>
>>> These reforms were approved by the City Charter
>> Commission back in 2002.
>>> Now it?s time to let the people decide to put them
>> in place.
>>>
>>> It?s a two-step process:
>>> 1. The City Council agrees to put this
>> proposal on this year?s ballot,
>>> and;
>>> 2. In the November, THE PEOPLE DECIDE!
>>>
>>> Who benefits from the 12+3 Proposal? We all do!
>>>
>>> ? With the 12+3 Reforms in place,
>> Providence will have three people
>>> (the At-Large Council members), plus the Mayor,
>> whose only job will be looking
>>> out for the interests of the whole City. Under the
>> current system, council
>>> members can only act on issues related to their
>> own ward. This narrow
>>> approach does nothing to help our city ? as a
>> whole!
>>> ? As Providence?s population continues
>> to evolve, having 3
>>> At-Large Councilors will improve the chances for
>> more diversity on the city
>>> council, and give more people the opportunity to
>> lay the groundwork necessary
>>> to become Mayor one day.
>>> ? With 3 At-Large Councilors, we?ll all
>> have three more people
>>> representing us on the city council (one from each
>> ward, and 3 At-Large
>>> members). The 12+3 Reforms will also increase
>> representation for minority
>>> populations who are spread out over the whole
>> city. For instance, our
>>> Southeast Asian population will have a better
>> chance to have a voice on the
>>> council where they don?t now.
>>>
>>> ? The 12+3 Reforms will make it easier
>> for candidates to raise the
>>> funds necessary for a strong campaign. At-Large
>> candidates will be able to
>>> raise campaign funds from all areas of the City
>> (and the State) - not just
>>> their neighborhood - increasing the pool of
>> available resources.
>>> ? Why 12+3? Based on the experience
>> of other cities, having 12
>>> wards and three at-large members provides the
>> right proportion of at-large
>>> members to those representing wards. This
>> proposal will allow for the kind of
>>> diversity that reflects the population of the
>> city. We do not need to
>>> increase the overall total of the Providence City
>> Council ? we just need to
>>> make it more responsive and more diverse!
>>> ? Providence needs to catch up. We are
>> one of the only cities our
>>> size without at-large council seats. We need to
>> enact this important reform
>>> here ? and the 12+3 proposal is the way to go.
>>> ? The citizen members of the Charter
>> Review Commission strongly
>>> recommended the 12+3 format in their 2002 report.
>> Now it?s time to debate
>>> that proposal and in November?
>>>
>>> ?LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE!
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>>
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/pipermail/summit_sna.providence.ri.us/attachm
> ents/20080605/97a3dc4f/attachment-0001.html
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 20:02:54 -0400
>> From: <e2shatter2 at cox.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Summit] At large council proposal
>> To: Jonathan Howard <jon at ceffect.com>
>> Cc: summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>> Message-ID:
>> <20080605200254.QZWMU.89750.imail at eastrmwml11>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> I don't like the idea. It takes a lot more money to
>> run citywide than in just a ward and the at-large
>> council members often end up representing downtown
>> business interests. That's what happened
>> in San Francisco when supervisors (SF is both a city
>> and a county) were elected at large rather
>> than by district.
>> ---- Jonathan Howard <jon at ceffect.com> wrote:
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Summit mailing list
>>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>>
>>
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 22:12:13 -0400
>> From: <libertyliterary at cox.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Summit] At large council proposal
>> To: e2shatter2 at cox.net, Jonathan Howard
>> <jon at ceffect.com>
>> Cc: summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>> Message-ID:
>> <20080605221213.O0YKM.159836.imail at eastrmwml35>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> I agree with this comment. As soon as it starts
>> costing more money to run,
>> people with money have more influence. Also, the
>> greater the number of
>> people represented, the less voice or significance
>> of each voter. I like the
>> fact that our smallness gives us more contact and
>> communication with
>> our legislators and city officials.
>>
>> ---- e2shatter2 at cox.net wrote:
>>
>> =============
>> I don't like the idea. It takes a lot more money to
>> run citywide than in just a ward and the at-large
>> council members often end up representing downtown
>> business interests. That's what happened
>> in San Francisco when supervisors (SF is both a city
>> and a county) were elected at large rather
>> than by district.
>> ---- Jonathan Howard <jon at ceffect.com> wrote:
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Summit mailing list
>>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>>
>>
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Summit mailing list
>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 22:12:36 -0400
>> From: <libertyliterary at cox.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Summit] At large council proposal
>> To: e2shatter2 at cox.net, Jonathan Howard
>> <jon at ceffect.com>
>> Cc: summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>> Message-ID:
>> <20080605221236.3I364.159851.imail at eastrmwml35>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> I agree with this comment. As soon as it starts
>> costing more money to run,
>> people with money have more influence. Also, the
>> greater the number of
>> people represented, the less voice or significance
>> of each voter. I like the
>> fact that our smallness gives us more contact and
>> communication with
>> our legislators and city officials.
>>
>> Blessings,
>>
>> Liberty G
>>
>> ---- e2shatter2 at cox.net wrote:
>>
>> =============
>> I don't like the idea. It takes a lot more money to
>> run citywide than in just a ward and the at-large
>> council members often end up representing downtown
>> business interests. That's what happened
>> in San Francisco when supervisors (SF is both a city
>> and a county) were elected at large rather
>> than by district.
>> ---- Jonathan Howard <jon at ceffect.com> wrote:
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Summit mailing list
>>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>>
>>
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Summit mailing list
>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 22:13:59 -0400
>> From: <libertyliterary at cox.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Summit] At large council proposal
>> To: Greg Gerritt <gerritt at mindspring.com>, Stephen
>> Durkee
>> <sdurkee at durkeebrown.com>, Jonathan Howard
>> <jon at ceffect.com>, Summit
>> Neighborhood <Summit at sna.providence.ri.us>
>> Message-ID:
>> <20080605221359.ROXIY.159879.imail at eastrmwml35>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> Right on, Greg!
>>
>> Blessings,
>>
>> Liberty G
>> ---- Greg Gerritt <gerritt at mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> =============
>> This topic has come before me several times
>> recently. I talked to a
>> political scientist who?s specialty is race and
>> politics. He points out
>> that systems like this further maginalize the poor
>> and people of color in
>> cities like Providence. It favors the wealthiest
>> candidates. It works
>> better if it is a proportional system rather than a
>> first past the post
>> system, but it still tends to further discrimiantion
>> against the poor.
>>
>> It is another one of those things that good
>> government types like to offer,
>> which while seductive on the surface, tend to
>> reinforce the power of the
>> ruling elites. Greg gerritt
>>
>>
>> on 6/5/08 10:33 AM, Jonathan Howard at
>> jon at ceffect.com wrote:
>>
>>> Neighbors,
>>>
>>> A group called the 12+3 Coalition is proposing to
>> change the way our City
>>> Council is elected. Right now the city has 15
>> members, all from geographic
>>> wards (ours is Ward 3). Each Council member is
>> elected by the voters of one
>>> ward. The coalition proposes to reduce the number
>> of wards to 12 and make
>>> three of the seats elected on a citywide or
>> "at-large" basis.
>>>
>>> Steve Durkee, the Chairman of the City Plan
>> Commission and a leading architect
>>> has shared these talking points in favor of the
>> change. What do you all think
>>> of this idea? Is the current geographic system
>> working for you? Do you think
>>> that at-large council members would make the
>> council more responsive to the
>>> whole city?
>>>
>>> I don't know the specifics, but like all city
>> ordinances, this legislation
>>> will need committee hearings and approval before
>> going to the full City
>>> Council. Evidently this is likely to come up this
>> year.
>>>
>>> Jon Howard
>>>
>>> ps. Note that Summit Neighborhood Association has
>> not considered or endorsed
>>> this proposal. I am sending this to you for your
>> information and response.
>>>
>>>
>>> Let the People Decide!
>>>
>>> The Case for Reform of the Providence City Council
>>>
>>> The 12+3 Coalition is a diverse group of
>> Providence citizens seeking
>>> much-needed, fundamental reforms in the way our
>> city is governed.
>>>
>>> Our proposal simple: Change to City Council to
>> include 12 council members,
>>> each representing one ward ? and three at-large
>> council members, each
>>> representing the entire City.
>>>
>>> These reforms were approved by the City Charter
>> Commission back in 2002.
>>> Now it?s time to let the people decide to put them
>> in place.
>>>
>>> It?s a two-step process:
>>> 1. The City Council agrees to put this
>> proposal on this year?s ballot,
>>> and;
>>> 2. In the November, THE PEOPLE DECIDE!
>>>
>>> Who benefits from the 12+3 Proposal? We all do!
>>>
>>> ? With the 12+3 Reforms in place,
>> Providence will have three people
>>> (the At-Large Council members), plus the Mayor,
>> whose only job will be looking
>>> out for the interests of the whole City. Under the
>> current system, council
>>> members can only act on issues related to their
>> own ward. This narrow
>>> approach does nothing to help our city ? as a
>> whole!
>>> ? As Providence?s population continues
>> to evolve, having 3
>>> At-Large Councilors will improve the chances for
>> more diversity on the city
>>> council, and give more people the opportunity to
>> lay the groundwork necessary
>>> to become Mayor one day.
>>> ? With 3 At-Large Councilors, we?ll all
>> have three more people
>>> representing us on the city council (one from each
>> ward, and 3 At-Large
>>> members). The 12+3 Reforms will also increase
>> representation for minority
>>> populations who are spread out over the whole
>> city. For instance, our
>>> Southeast Asian population will have a better
>> chance to have a voice on the
>>> council where they don?t now.
>>>
>>> ? The 12+3 Reforms will make it easier
>> for candidates to raise the
>>> funds necessary for a strong campaign. At-Large
>> candidates will be able to
>>> raise campaign funds from all areas of the City
>> (and the State) - not just
>>> their neighborhood - increasing the pool of
>> available resources.
>>> ? Why 12+3? Based on the experience
>> of other cities, having 12
>>> wards and three at-large members provides the
>> right proportion of at-large
>>> members to those representing wards. This
>> proposal will allow for the kind of
>>> diversity that reflects the population of the
>> city. We do not need to
>>> increase the overall total of the Providence City
>> Council ? we just need to
>>> make it more responsive and more diverse!
>>> ? Providence needs to catch up. We are
>> one of the only cities our
>>> size without at-large council seats. We need to
>> enact this important reform
>>> here ? and the 12+3 proposal is the way to go.
>>> ? The citizen members of the Charter
>> Review Commission strongly
>>> recommended the 12+3 format in their 2002 report.
>> Now it?s time to debate
>>> that proposal and in November?
>>>
>>> ?LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Summit mailing list
>> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
>>
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
>>
>>
>> End of Summit Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4
>> *************************************
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Summit mailing list
> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
> http://mail.sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
More information about the Summit
mailing list