Josh Narins wrote:
>
>
> Voting systems are a subset of Social Choice theory of Game Theory. The
> kind Americans have is called first past the post(FPTP) or "lone mark."
> It is the least expressive of any system.
The only way some alternative voting procedure could be introduced is if it were approved by a large majority of the politicians who are committed and will remain committed to the present system, for two reasons: (a) the present system is in the interest of politicians who are elected by it (duh!) and, more importantly, (b) it is in the interest of those elements of the population (see subject line above) whose interests those politicians are committed to serving.
On another list, in response to queries of how workers should respond to the crisis in autos, one poster wrote:
> labor militants should follow Hugo Chavez's lead and NATIONALIZE the
> resources of these formerly american companies.. just long enough to redistribute the
> ownership equally into the hands of the former employees.
>
> it'll be chaotic at first, with company planning done by committee and vote
> processing.. but eventually, we'll have some serious wealth distribution.
As laughable as this proposal is (as an immediate goal) it is, actually, no less laughable than proposals to reconstitute the whole system of elections in the u.s. In fact I would think that in the longer run seizing control of the corporations would be rather easier than persuading those corporations to allow a constitutional change in the voting system.
Carrol