POLITICAL REFORM

You can say I lost my faith in the politicians

They all seem like game show hosts to me

-Sting

MESPLAY FOR PRESIDENT

In its essence the Green Party is proactive, not reactive. Ranked choice voting or Preferential Voting or Instant Runoff Voting (I.R.V.) are methods through which only a candidate with majority support is elected. The basic method has merit in that, in close races (e.g. Florida in 2000) support of votes and voters otherwise "lost to third party candidates" still come into play in determining the eventual winner. It is likely that Nader supporters would have chosen Gore as their back-up, rather than Bush. In the first and subsequent rounds of tallying, if a candidate does not have over 50% support, then the next-preferred candidate on the otherwise dropped ballot of the last-place candidate is counted. In this way, the candidate with the most broad-band support bubbles to the top: Gore would likely have won. The process allows a more representative level of candidate support to be determined and it saves money by obviating a separate run-off election.  I would do away with the electoral college system and allow people to actually directly vote for president using preferential voting, which guarantees that no winner is selected with a slim plurality:  simple majority wins are enforced.  Apart from Republican party shenanigans the real "Bush vs. Gore" problem in Florida was that many Democrats voted for the brother of their governor to be president. The problem is not with Nader or that there is a Green Party raising serious questions. The problem is with our political system and you can help change that.  Al Gore was the winner in 2000.

In San Diego during the Primary election there was a measure on the ballot making it illegal to be a write-in candidate in a General Election if one was not actively running in the primary.  The premise was that only a Democrat and a Republican would make it to the General Election and limiting the race to two people would ensure that the winner would have over 50% of the vote.  A better solution that does not discourage participation in the political process would be to institute preferential voting:  a better method guaranteeing a majority winner among multiple candidates than to essentially restrict the race to two candidates:  the usual Democrat and Republican. Our "winner take all" system has a problem in that it encourages people to block the candidate they like the least.  Preferential voting empowers people to actually vote their conscience when there are acceptable candidates in the race, knowing that others, too, may support a good candidate who does not have the money to be a frontrunner. Preferential voting is a tool of democracy in multi-party, multi-candidate races.  The current system discourages political competition and debate and it is not useful toward building a truly multi-party government.

Part of the problem with our government is the influence of money in politics, which is tantamount to institutionalized bribery. Asking the Democratic and Republican party bosses to enact meaningful change by calling for exclusively publicly funded campaigning and an end to lobbying is like asking the fox guarding the hen-house to clean up the feathers around its muzzle. We have a corrupt political system, but I refuse to not vote. The money given to politicians "educates" them to "ear-mark" bills, thus tainting their real decision-making abilities. Problems of our society are best addressed by legislators whose motives are not as questionable. A true separation of powers would include banning monetary contributions to those who are supposed to serve the common good. Giving a small contribution each month to Green Party candidates (hint, hint) is similar to publicly-financed campaigns into which everyone pays a little and no "representative" is bought-off.

Alternative political parties have historically influenced those in charge to enact reforms. Part of the problem regarding Green Party acceptance is that there is a misperception that Greens are a shadow wing of the Democratic party. Indeed, people do register Green after having been Democrats and there is great commonality with the more progressive Democrats. However, there are many Greens who once were Republicans or who were with other parties. We get much support from people who have registered Decline to State. When I was campaigning in Maryland I heard from a visiting elected Green that elected Greens get along with Republicans because we are fiscally conservative. I thought Bush could be defeated by a Green in 2004 based in large part on his malfeasance, his nonchalant deficit spending. On matters of foreign relations Greens are strong in recognizing that issues such as terrorism are multi-faceted, arising from several causes that need to be recognized and addressed.  To brand terrorism as simply a problem of physical violence is to miss the point and to miss opportunities for acceptably resolving conflict. Too, our militaries world-wide will need to be reformed and restructured to enable the saving of lives imperiled from natural disaster. Global Climate Change is a security issue and is the defining issue of our time.

It would be good if Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, American Independent and Green candidates were to be allowed to debate. It is good for our state when candidates to public office are candid, speak openly and make their motives clear. Whatever happened to the principle of competition of ideas?  I encourage the reader to register Green, or if not Green, Libertarian or Decline to State.  I will work to reduce the size of government and to strengthen the independence and survivability of local regions so that we don't have to wait for the feds to help us every time we have a little natural disaster. California, in particular, has a strong enough economy that it could not only provide better for itself but would ideally help other states during their time of need. We can do this. You need to register and vote.

The National Election Reform Platform (NERP) is a common platform for a series of electoral reform. If enacted, it would make voting more representative of the conscience of the voters through preferential voting, increase the choice for voters on the ballot through loosened third party restrictions, increase voting access for citizens, and allow for equal media access/debate inclusion to ensure a true competition of multiple ideas. You can view a flier about NERP here.

By registering Green, Libertarian or Decline to State you have more influence than you may think. Perhaps it is time to try an experiment: "vote" by registering other than Democrat or Republican and support Green Party candidates in upcoming elections.  Bad government is elected by non-voters.  

Of those who are eligible to register and vote in California only about a quarter actually vote.  When a "landslide" victory is proclaimed in politics, it is expressed as a large percentage out of the ever-narrowing slice of participants (inside the red zone in the graphic) and not as the pitifully small percentage out of the population of eligible voters.  One could win with less than 10%. [I generated the pie chart using numbers off the Secretary of State web site regarding participation in the primary election of 2006.  See my "volunteer" page for more.]  Spread the word.  Tell everyone you know.  Help me get elected.

Mesplay for President

Freedom to Debate.  Mesplay for President.