Read on Twitter
Now that Dems have won control of government, Congress *must* pass, and Biden *must* sign, ranked-choice voting (RCV) reform, preferably including multimember districts and enlarging the size of the House.
Thread, & proposal for leftists/progressives below
Thread, & proposal for leftists/progressives below
This reform + mandatory independent redistricting commissions for Congressional elections was proposed last Congress in the form of #HR4000, sponsored by @RoKhanna, @RepRaskin, and others. Check this article for a good overview on multi-member districts: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/10/opinion/house-representatives-size-multi-member.html
RCV is tough to get enacted in a solid two-party system for the same reason that it's so necessary right now - it decreases the power of the two entrenched parties. But at this moment it could actually be to the benefit of a majority of people in Congress.
There are obvious schisms and fault lines within both major parties, and politicians on one side of those lines have obvious discomfort being associated with those on the other side. RCV would allow those schisms to happen by not electorally punishing party splits.
It's very clear that Biden doesn't want to be associated with the left-wing's "defund the police"-type rhetoric. Fine. @AOC already said that in another country (one with a functioning democracy), she and Biden would be in different parties. She's right. Let it happen.
Give the Conor Lambs and Abigail Spanbergers of the world what they want. If they don't want to have "socialism" rhetoric used against them, fine. They can stay attached to Nancy Pelosi while leftists make a new party.
Moderate and Trumpist Republicans might endorse this change too, especially after yesterday. I don't know that a Mitt Romney wants to be associated with a Ted Cruz & Josh Hawley, and it feels like the feeling is mutual.
But because Dems will control Congress completely, they don't need buy-in from Republicans if they really want the reform. And beyond individual member preferences, there's a really compelling reason why the party should pass this reform before the 2022 elections: redistricting.
Democrats failed to pick up state legislative seats last year, and those state legislatures will control redistricting. Dems are on track to lose the House in 2022 based on redistricting alone. These reforms would go a long way toward preventing that.
Not only would independent redistricting commissions solve a lot of the problem by themselves, but multi-member districts with RCV are going to be harder to game. These reforms are necessary for the Democratic Party's own electoral survival.
And that brings me to the proposal for leftists. Because we've been frustrated for so long about there being no realistic alternative to the two-party duopoly, but I think we can actually do something about it. And if framed correctly, we can even get broader support.
We know Democrats have the power to make these changes if they want to. I've outlined why they *should* want to. We can give them more reasons.
There are about 63 House districts that are safely but moderately Democratic - by 7 to 15 points. I think these districts are especially vulnerable to progressive third-party challenges - not so Dem as to not need to be concerned, but Dem enough to have a lot of leftist voters.
Leftists could make 3rd-party/independent challenges in these moderately Dem districts based *explicitly* on calls for voting reform. Dems depend on 3rd parties being seen as nonviable, and we can cut through that framing by demanding that Dems fix the problem. Take the hostage.
This framing lets us bring others on board as well, even those not devoted to the leftist/progressive cause. If you are unsatisfied with the two-party duopoly, supporting the candidate running explicitly to force the duopoly into ending itself is how you can make your voice heard
I have no real opinion about whether this should be done through an already-existing 3rd party - it may need to be in some places due to stringent ballot access rules, but I think having it attached to a party with pre-existing policy goals is a hindrance to getting broad support
One catch: we have to start *early*. Our immediate goal is not to influence the 2022 elections; it's to make something happen before those elections. So we have to be building the structure and starting the movement soon.
Tl;dr: We can force a Dem congress into enacting voting reforms that would make 3rd parties viable. We can do this with a national movement, focused on particular House districts, that runs 3rd party candidates early with the explicit demand that Dems enact these reforms.
@MirzaSahib72 I don't know that this will get any actual attention but this is what I hinted at the other day. I think if this movement actually happened it could be extremely successful
