Thank you for that reply, Jim.
I may not be the best writer, but voting systems do change the outcomes in society. I am supporting this position in the following article with data I collected in 2006.
https://medium.com/@fred-rick/voting-systems-matter-22b9880926ce
Yet it is relatively simple to see what is going on.
When voters compete with voters for the win (and it does not matter if they have 100 choices, because only 1 ends up in the seat, so there are lots of losers among the voters), then underrepresentation will be a fact. That also means there will be overrepresentation of a certain kind (middle of society, with a slant toward the rich, the well-connected, etc).
Here is the simple math:
When 60% of the voters have their desired candidate win the seat, plus when all these representatives make a decision with 60%, then the actual voter support for that decision is
.6 x .6 = .36
Now, in the fair voting system (proportional voting), 99% of the voters can point their fingers to the candidate they voted for themselves, sitting in a seat, representing them. When these representatives make a decision with 60% of the vote, then the actual voter support for that decision is
.99 x .6 = .594
Recognize therefore that in district elections voters are forced to pick a single representative, so that means a slash and burn of what many other people wanted because only the majority is represented, no one else.
It turns out that the bottom of society is least represented, underrepresented by default, all because of the way the vote is taken.
In Thomas Jefferson's clean voting system, the maximum of voters are represented by their own choice.
--
In the US Constitution, the Federal level is described in details, and so district voting is just fine. It is the way it is.
Yet in the Amendments, one can read that the states must live up to a higher standard. They cannot undermine the privileges of US Citizens. Voting in districts cuts that privilege down and instead declares winners (who are represented by their choice) and losers (who are not represented by their choice).
So, the states not following the US Constitution, that is a taking. They are taking away our constitutional privilege at state and local levels.
--
The story is very complex still. There are many details that one has to understand before the full picture about all kinds of voting systems is above water, but it starts with understanding that flipping a coin is different from rolling a die.
The coin limits us to 2 options.
The die limits us to 6 options.
Ergo, the coin is more limiting for the voters than the die.
Thank you for reading the article, Jim. I really do appreciate your reply, and I hope that you will share with me your further comments.
