Why has bipartisan support for rail dwindled?

[Bob Dylan]

Sounds like the good people of the Buckeye State got fed up enough to take back the power that is rightfully theirs!☺

Hopefully more folks in other states will wake up and exercise their right to representative government!

 

[Ryan]

Arizona has done the same thing recently, and got challenged (unsuccessfully) in court.

 

[jis]

It is truly ironical that the Republican Party adopted a rule that would have made Comrade Lenin proud

 

[Bob Dylan]

It is truly ironical that the Republican Party adopted a rule that would have made Comrade Lenin proud

Yep, Comrades McCarthy, Nixon, Hoover, Cohen and the other Witch Hunters from the 50s must be rolling over in their graves!

 

[Anderson]

One of the pros of proportional representation is that it breaks you out of a two party system. If for example you are righ wingish but don't like the present main right wing party, you can vote for another right wing party that you find more acceptable. Same thing on the left. It would take a lot befoire a right winger would vote a left wing party (or vice versa) because of his disgust at the present right wing party. So there is generally little voter mobility outside of the center ground. In proportional representation, the parties need to stay on their toes much more and do what the people want as there are always smaller rival parties ready to pick up the disillusioned voters.

The downside to that is that no party ever gets enough votes to form a government alone so you get coalitions, and coalitions mean the parties have to throw some of their promises out of the window to form a coalition with a party that promised something different. Also, most coalitions tend to be center-left or center right so the center party is almost always in power and has kingmaking powers. In many European countries you will thus find that the political center is where most of the corruption is.

Well, the big downside (in my mind) is that even if you have a strong mandate for a given party's platform (say, 40% of the electorate in a system where half a dozen parties are represented in Parliament or the equivalent) it's possible to see that mandate functionally "worked around" and/or the "main" party on one side cut a deal with the "other side" to avoid having to work with fringe interests on their own side (I can give examples in Germany, Austria, and Sweden). It's also possible to see "unworkable" situations emerge (Greece came very close earlier this year).

To put it another way, I see PR as not necessarily producing "a government representing the support of a majority of the voters' wishes" but rather a situation where "Sir Humphrey will get his way unless 50% of the voters end up under a banner opposing him".

I'm not opposed to elements of PR, but...honestly, in terms of seat structure I most like Japan's (roughly 2/3 of the seats are FPTP, with the remaining 1/3 being PR). If an election is close, you'll get a minority situation, but if you get a decisive result (I'd say 40% with a healthy margin over #2) you get a clear majority in the legislature.

 

[neroden]

Anderson: for a *dramatic* counterexample, look at Scotland, which overwhelmingly elected a supermajority SNP Parliament. Under a proportional representation system.