4 ms·

> the two main political parties. Two parties is a feature often defined by State election law. Some States like Illinois specifically mention Rs and Ds. Other

> the two main political parties. Two parties is a feature often defined by State election law. Some States like Illinois specifically mention Rs and Ds. Other States often use a method of favoring (donation limits) major parties which is determined by off-year results in a race like the Governor. Partisanship matters because of benefits in State election laws. State legislators who are Ds and Rs know this and don't talk about it because it would reduce their club powers. I would clean out the State election laws before applying band-aids and lotions.

defrost 4y ago
The US two party oligarchy is particularly silly given the poor unrepresentative outcomes and the vocal opposition to political parties overall by many of the US founding fathers.
dane-pgp 4y ago
> I would clean out the State election laws before applying band-aids and lotions. I don't see why the two approaches can't be run in parallel. I agree with you, though, that laws which privilege specific parties (or even parties generally over independent candidates) have no place in a democracy. Have there not been any cases brought which challenge the constitutionality of such laws? I know that Lawrence Lessig tried to challenge Winner Take All (plurality) voting in the US under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment[0], which seemed like a bit of a long shot, whereas I don't think that the establishment would feel particularly threatened by having to rewrite a few state laws to be more neutral. Presumably there are plenty of states that don't have such laws, and they are equally locked into the two-party system. [0] https://medium.lessig.org/the-equal-protection-challenge-to-winner-take-all-a-legal-guide-ce99747e5001 https://medium.lessig.org/the-equal-protection-challenge-to-...
- landemva 4y ago
  Sometimes difficult to show harm and standing. Appeals are expensive. The States I looked at have major/minor party and other hindrances such as mandatory reports to secretary of state by party officers from each county. Maybe I would look in N.H. election laws for a place without this.
  - dane-pgp 4y ago
    > Sometimes difficult to show harm and standing. Appeals are expensive. That's true, but it seems like an easier case to bring than the cases that have challenged gerrymandering, for example.

defrost 4y ago

The US two party oligarchy is particularly silly given the poor unrepresentative outcomes and the vocal opposition to political parties overall by many of the US founding fathers.

dane-pgp 4y ago

> I would clean out the State election laws before applying band-aids and lotions. I don't see why the two approaches can't be run in parallel. I agree with you, though, that laws which privilege specific parties (or even parties generally over independent candidates) have no place in a democracy. Have there not been any cases brought which challenge the constitutionality of such laws? I know that Lawrence Lessig tried to challenge Winner Take All (plurality) voting in the US under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment[0], which seemed like a bit of a long shot, whereas I don't think that the establishment would feel particularly threatened by having to rewrite a few state laws to be more neutral. Presumably there are plenty of states that don't have such laws, and they are equally locked into the two-party system. [0] https://medium.lessig.org/the-equal-protection-challenge-to-winner-take-all-a-legal-guide-ce99747e5001 https://medium.lessig.org/the-equal-protection-challenge-to-...

landemva 4y ago
Sometimes difficult to show harm and standing. Appeals are expensive. The States I looked at have major/minor party and other hindrances such as mandatory reports to secretary of state by party officers from each county. Maybe I would look in N.H. election laws for a place without this.
- dane-pgp 4y ago
  > Sometimes difficult to show harm and standing. Appeals are expensive. That's true, but it seems like an easier case to bring than the cases that have challenged gerrymandering, for example.