>Any political reform worthy its name should focus on instituting the
>no-confidence vote instead of fooling around with third parties or
>electoral college.
The ability to call new elections at the will of the parliament is the least attractive part of the parliamentary systems. Yes, it sometimes brings down unpopular prime ministers, but usually to the advantage of the ruling party to shuffle executives for public relations reasons and to help win the next election. (Think replacing Thatcher in order to win the next British election for the Tories).
And the fact that ruling parties can call elections during the most favorable political conditions just further helps ruling parties.
The US recalls the whole House of Representatives every two years, a far more frequent occurence than most countries. [Our Senate is a different matter and a problem for democracy in a range of ways.] The real problem with the House is exactly the first-past-the-post system, since it means that House incumbents can be gerrymandered into safe seats, disenfranchising whichever party is herded into permanent minorities in a large number of districts. Third parties don't solve that problem, either. What is needed is some system of proportional representation or cumulative voting. Unlikely to ever happen given our constitutional straightjacket, but a serious problem since the majority of most Congresspeople are essentially unopposed in each election.
-- Nathan Newman