Comments on: Port Chester Cumulative Voting Seems More Useful to Minor Parties and Independents than to Hispanics

By: Katie

Katie — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 12:08:17 +0000

@Pete, what your saying is that minorities should be able to vote based on the color of the candidates skin and not on they’re ability to do the job? ignorance

By: wolfefan

wolfefan — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 13:50:53 +0000

In this particular election, Didden probably had some advantages that other third-party candidates will not. He was one of the parties in an eminent domain case that went to the US Supreme Court, and as such is probably a) well-known in Port Chester and b) a symbol/standard bearer for people who would like to see reform of eminent domain laws.

By: Melty

Melty — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:46:33 +0000

That’s right, Ross, but it’s no accident that many proponents mention IRV and proportional representation in the same breathe. At first FairVote was mainly for proportional representation methods, but then they decided to push IRV. Many proponents see it as a stepping stone. I just wonder why they don’t ditch IRV (especially now that folks’re getting wise to its pitfalls) and push Cumulative Voting. It’s better than IRV(as are about all voting methods) and Cumulative may well be a stepping stone towards proportional representation.

By: pete healey

pete healey — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:42:44 +0000

Yeah, we have a call for a constitutional convention in New York because of the pitiful way our state legislature is operating, and one of the most prominent proponents is calling for delegates to be elected by cumulative voting. The convention statute calls for three delegates to be elected from each of the Senate’s 62 districts, so it’s a natural for cumulative voting. A determined minority can always focus its efforts. On IRV, this argument is playing itself out in Britain, where a referendum is in the offing and the debate is whether it will be for IRV (which they call ‘AV’ for Alternative Vote) or another method which provides for proportionality nationwide.

By: Ross Levin

Ross Levin — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 02:58:02 +0000

Melty, IRV isn’t a method of proportional representation, nor is it marketed as such.

By: Melty

Melty — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 02:27:47 +0000

Cumulative voting’s not bad. Those who seek the “proportional representation” ideal would do well to propound cumulative voting, instead of the woefully problematic elimination/reallocation method that goes by the name of “instant runoff” and other misleading names.

By: Ross

Ross — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 02:02:18 +0000

Good luck spreading proportional representation further in New York, Pete. Send any news to contact.ipr@gmail.com – we’ll be sure to post it.

By: pete healey

pete healey — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 01:21:31 +0000

Minor Parties having an advantage in an election in New York State? Really?!?! That seems to me a good thing. This board now has a Latino Democrat (a first), a Black Republican (another first), an independent conservative (another first), and a Conservative Party member who ran independently of the Republicans (not a first but unusual in itself). This is a village that has been dominated by Republicans for decades, and there are only two of them on this 7-member board (which includes the Democrat Mayor). Congrats to the Mayor who insisted and persisted in implementing this experiment. So far it looks like a great success at electing a representative government!