3 ms·

Sure do. Amanda Taub, for the NYT. https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/template/oakv2?campaign_id=30&emc=edit_int_20200930&instance_id=22657&nl=th

Sure do. Amanda Taub, for the NYT. https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/template/oakv2?campaign_id=30&emc=edit_int_20200930&instance_id=22657&nl=the-interpreter&productCode=INT&regi_id=75187796&segment_id=39422&te=1&uri=nyt%3A%2F%2Fnewsletter%2F3b932a6a-7d83-5b6b-b99d-7a52140bd382&user_id=597d101a9fb76ff57b26d8e556b02a61 https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/template/oa... Edit: here's a reprint in case that first link (from an NYT email newsletter) doesn't work: http://www.barcelonaradical.net/info/12380/the-democracy-reform-paradox-amanda-taub-max-fisher http://www.barcelonaradical.net/info/12380/the-democracy-ref... Leaving smaller states feeling politically powerless can encourage separatist/independence movements and threaten the long-term viability of the country. Do you have a source for that? Proportional representation does seem to solve for it. See also: far right parties gaining seats in Germany. Their views get heard (if not enacted), no one secedes, and the system remains stable.

skissane 6y ago
There is no incompatibility between having proportional representation and having bicameralism. Federally, Australia has preferential voting (instant-runoff voting) in the House of Representatives and single transferrable vote is used to elect 12 senators for each state (only 6 in a normal election, the full 12 only get re-elected in a special "double dissolution" election, which the government is allowed to order to break a deadlock between the two houses). You mention Germany, which is a bicameral system as well (the Bundesrat). For the benefits of federal bicameralism, consider the UK – England has almost 85% of the population, and so in a purely one-person-one-vote system will always outvote the other three constituent countries. The UK does have bicameralism, but non-federal – the House of Lords does not directly represent the constituent countries, and does not provide a mechanism to block an English majority – the majority of the House of Lords is English too. And I think this is one of the major factors driving the Scottish independence movement. If the UK had a system more like Australia – with an upper house providing equal representation to each part of the country, regardless of population, and with constitutional referendums requiring a double majority to pass (both a majority of the national population, and also a majority of the population in a majority of the states) – then I don't think the Scottish independence movement would have anywhere near as much steam as it has.

skissane 6y ago

There is no incompatibility between having proportional representation and having bicameralism. Federally, Australia has preferential voting (instant-runoff voting) in the House of Representatives and single transferrable vote is used to elect 12 senators for each state (only 6 in a normal election, the full 12 only get re-elected in a special "double dissolution" election, which the government is allowed to order to break a deadlock between the two houses). You mention Germany, which is a bicameral system as well (the Bundesrat). For the benefits of federal bicameralism, consider the UK – England has almost 85% of the population, and so in a purely one-person-one-vote system will always outvote the other three constituent countries. The UK does have bicameralism, but non-federal – the House of Lords does not directly represent the constituent countries, and does not provide a mechanism to block an English majority – the majority of the House of Lords is English too. And I think this is one of the major factors driving the Scottish independence movement. If the UK had a system more like Australia – with an upper house providing equal representation to each part of the country, regardless of population, and with constitutional referendums requiring a double majority to pass (both a majority of the national population, and also a majority of the population in a majority of the states) – then I don't think the Scottish independence movement would have anywhere near as much steam as it has.