Time for a campaign for democracy.

• Author: Richie, Rob
• Position: Election 2004: Green Analyses

Sifting through the results of the November 2 elections provides important lessons for Greens and others seeking to bring more democracy to our country. The first is that progressives are thwarted above all by our electoral system structures. The second is that instant runoff voting has real viability as a short-term reform.

We certainly should keep pressure on for meaningful campaign finance reform and for ways to boost voter turnout, but in a year in which Democrats were financially competitive and voter turnout was at its highest since 1968, George Bush won a majority of the vote and carried 31 states and the Republican House majority increased. The election wasn't the Republican mandate some claim, yet it should be a clarion call to reformers.

The unprecedented level of non-competitiveness in a House where Republicans have a comfortable majority should be of particular concern to those who want progressive leadership in the House. More than 95% of seats were won by margins of more than 10%--a record. Only 7 incumbents lost, for a rate of more than 98%, and 4 of those incumbent only lost due to Tom Delay's 2003 gerrymander in Texas. Almost all House districts were not competitive for 2 parties, let alone 3.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The lack of congressional competition is partly due to redistricting, partly due to incumbent advantages, partly due to campaign finance inequities, but primarily due to the fact of winner-take-all elections in single-seat districts.

Demographically, Democrats are more concentrated in urban areas, and even independent redistricting commissions will have difficulty creating more competition as long as we maintain winner-take-all rules.

Furthermore, progressive vote concentration means that if the nation continues in a roughly 50-50 political mode between Republicans and those challenging them, Republicans will win every time. If the 2000 presidential election results are layered onto the current House districts, for example, George Bush would have won 47 more districts than Al Gore even while losing the popular vote.

Full representation (i.e., proportional representation) voting methods in multi-seat districts are the one indispensable part of any reform package seeking to provide real choices and fair representation to all voters.

Greens have an obvious interest in tackling winner-take-all elections. Full representation has been essential to nearly every Green candidate success in other nations around the world...