[LINK] Why Electronic Voting?

[Jan Whitaker]

At 11:07 AM 18/11/2006, Stewart Fist wrote:
>4. I think the problem with the Australian electoral system lies much more
>in the party's selection of candidates, than in the voting system itself.

Agree totally! The fact that a candidate in some elections can be 
dropped into a seat as a reward is abhorent to me. They could never 
be considered representatives of the voters in the specific 
electorate in that case. Thankfully Victorian rules require that reps 
live in their electorates. We had two cases in my time here (Narre 
Warren North for anyone who cares) where one lower house member had 
fudged on this and was embarrassed and ousted, and I can't remember 
the specifics on the other one, but it had to do with using a parent's address.

In the US, the people vote in primaries several months prior to the 
main vote in November in most states, or attend meetings in others, 
to select from a slate of candidates in the parties. A person can 
self-nominate to be in the primary IIRC. It takes a certain number of 
signatures to get on the ballot. For a citizen to vote in a primary, 
you have to choose which party you want to vote in, Republican or 
Democrat (I'm not aware of any minor parties being on primary 
ballots, and independents just run, don't stand in primaries). But 
you aren't a 'member' in the sense of the word here. It can be 
different from election to election, too, including saying no party, 
but then you can't vote in a primary to select the candidates for the 
main election.

Heck, I even get to do this for Arizona since that is my last state 
of residence. I voted in the midterm election just a few weeks ago.

>5. One major advantage of preferential voting, is that you can protest
>against a major political party, while not automatically handing the
>equivalent of a vote to the alternate major party.   In America, when you
>voted for Nader you automatically stripped a vote from Al Gore, since, to a
>very large extent (but not absolutely), it was Democratic voters who
>supported the Nader (pox-on-both-your-houses) position.
>
>The ability to use the preferential system as a protest-vote -- without
>emasculating yourself in the process -- is an important aspect in what is
>essentially a two-party system.

Agree totally! Once I learnt how it works in practice, not just the 
technical aspects of preferential, I think this concept would be a 
terrific improvement in the US. The secret ballot and women voting 
was exported from here. Why not preferential voting as the modern 
contribution? :-)

'Splitting the vote' because of third candidates is always a danger in the US.

Jan (still procratinating)


Jan Whitaker
JLWhitaker Associates, Melbourne Victoria
jwhit at janwhitaker.com
business: http://www.janwhitaker.com
personal: http://www.janwhitaker.com/personal/
commentary: http://janwhitaker.com/jansblog/

'Seed planting is often the most important step. Without the seed, 
there is no plant.' - JW, April 2005
_ __________________ _