The People before the Parties
Editor's note/correction: The following proposal was written and proposed by the Politics and Electoral Reform group at Occupy Wall Street.
This proposal was developed by the Politics and Electoral Reform group at Occupy Wall Street between September and November 2011. It contains input from well over 100 individuals who attended group meetings in Liberty Plaza as well as many others from across the country who influenced the proposal through online discussions. The document was produced through a collaborative writing process. It was approved by the Politics and Electoral Reform group with full consensus support on November 6, 2011.
————–
People Before Parties: Recommendations for Electoral Reform
A proposal of the Politics and Electoral Reform working group at Occupy Wall Street
Free and fair elections inspire good citizenship and public service. They engage the intelligence, good will, and real interests of the people. Free and fair elections ensure that citizens can control their own political destiny, and make genuine contributions to society through sound self-government. Free and fair elections can remedy myriad ills and counteract the abuses of a government that has come to prey upon the resources and spirit of citizens.
The centralization of political power in the hands of two narrow factions at all levels of government is neither democratic nor republican. No party system whatsoever is mandated by the U.S. Constitution. Today, government of the people, by the people and for the people has been transformed into government of the people, by the parties, for the corporations.
Faced with a choice between a Republican and a Democrat, when there is any choice, the majority of Americans no longer vote in the majority of elections. The current party system has brought about a crisis of democracy.
Bipolar party government cannot account for the diverse, multipolar body of the US electorate. The party system has led to a crisis of representation.
The states are the laboratories of democracy. We urge states, localities, and General Assemblies nationwide to begin a series of bold new experiments in democratic self-government to open our political system to the 99% who go unrepresented by party factions.
We call for experimentation with reforms to create a level playing field for all voters and for all candidates for elected office – whatever their party affiliation or lack thereof may be –, and to curtail the influence of corporations and entrenched political factions over our system of government.
We recommend experimentation with (in no particular order):
• Alternative voting methods. Our voting systems should promote honest participatory democracy. There are alternatives to plurality voting, such as instant runoff voting, ranked choice voting, approval voting and range voting, liquid democracy and so on.
• Independent, nonpartisan redistricting reform. Voters should choose their representatives; lawmakers should not choose their own voters.
• Expansion of the number of representatives in local and state government and in the House of Representatives. This will ensure a closer relationship between the people and their elected officials, putting the latter on a shorter leash.
• Proportional representation. Winner-take-all, single member district plurality voting has allowed narrow political factions to wield disproportionate influence within our system of government. There are alternatives.
• Expansion of franchise. Those who are denied of the right to vote because they have, for example, served time in prison, should be re-enfranchised.
• Term limits. Election to public office is not a lifetime appointment. Term limits should be imposed by law or by the people at the ballot box. (Disagree; the other reforms will address the unfair advantage of incumbents. The right way is not to balance the unfair advantage with an unfair disadvantage.)
• Ballot access reform. All should be equal before the law regardless of party affiliation or lack thereof. Ballot access laws that favor the major parties and discriminate against independent and third party candidates should be repealed and replaced with fair and reasonable alternatives.
• Primary election reform. A publicly funded election should be open to the public. If parties desire to hold closed primary elections, they can provide for their own caucuses and conventions.
• Initiatives and referenda. The people retain the right to originate ballot initiatives and referenda.
• Vote counting. The reintroduction of hand counted, paper ballots, or the introduction of significant controls to protect against the rigging of electronic voting machines, which are produced, operated and serviced by corporations with significant ties to powerful political factions. (Rewrite? ALL ballots should be on paper; the choice is hand-counted or transparent machine-counted.)
• Weekend or holiday voting. Voting should be encouraged not discouraged.
• Fusion voting. If they so desire, parties should be able to nominate the candidates of their choice across party lines.
• Campaign finance. Publicly funded election campaigns, or matching fund systems that allow candidates who refuse to accept corporate donations to compete on a level playing field with candidates who are heavily financed by corporate interests.
• Combination and synthesis. A liquid democratic primary with an IRV runoff between the top four candidates from the primary. Countless other possibilities.
This list is not exhaustive. We urge assemblies nationwide to deliberate on reforms that can open our system of government to the people and put people before parties. We urge states and localities to implement reforms.
CONNECT




30 comments on "The People before the Parties"
July 23, 2012 5:13am
Nice list of electoral reforms! I encourage people to vote, and to vote 3rd party. The Democratic and Republican wings of the Corporate Party need to go! Or at least be reduced to a couple of a many parties.
I support IRV or ranked voting with multi-winner districting. I do want to vote for individuals rather than a party. These methods should result in a more proportional representation without making people just vote for a party.
rqafve
mvddyj
muoful
jvkakej
wtfbnt
clkodjxt
pcqlhi
vklkvzks
nrfsep
irhfiqsq
mxucvmbq
wlgvdw
January 14, 2012 3:36am
roll forming machine
forming machine
pipe welding line
cut to length line
slitting line
.In . (Webster's Two Completely new Riverside College Thesaurus).
Exactly what are all these harmful microorganisms? Bad bacteria associated with microbial, protozoan, virus-like or perhaps yeast source have been completely suggested as a factor just as causal reasons inside nicotine gum ailment. You overload basically is actually diagnosed known as Streptococcus mutans. Streptococcus mutans, as well as Streptococcus Sobrinus would be the bacterias that cause the majority of teeth cavities and gums and teeth. Streptococcus mutans can be described as heterotrophic affected individual which unfortunately basically means which it will need to reside off of a different affected person during the day some other patient and / or utilizing them as being a a lot
tMnwwg pwmorsrjhvbv
B71IcI , [url=http://nkpusciuogji.com/]nkpusciuogji[/url], [link=http://cfjajdkmfqbq.com/]cfjajdkmfqbq[/link], http://uqvyrvkzwkhx.com/
January 11, 2012 6:51pm
Tera Priest - Tera News - www.teragoldnow.com
GfGC9K pdztozsvryry
If not for your writing this topic could be very conovulted and oblique.
December 19, 2011 10:51am
This Defense Authorization Act will guarantee imprisoning our 99 %--- What is being done about it.
These congressional traitors are taking away all our rights. The fortune 400 families are the ones bribing congress and they are the ones that should be spied on and every step haunted.
This is a war on the 99 % , but these treasonous families are not even made uncomfortable. The link below is a list of the families.
http://www.forbes.com/forbes-400/list/ Ocupy the homes of these traitors.
November 18, 2011 3:46pm
Instant Runoff Voting sounds like a good idea, but it is complex to count and incentivizes complex software to tally it. In Aspen Colorado, in their one and only IRV election, the corporation paid to tally the votes used the wrong tallying program to count the votes. It took 2 weeks for the public to realize that the votes had been mis counted. The corporation refused to let the public see the vote data stored on a computer disc.
IRV has been associated with very low turnout elections:
-Minneapolis had its first instant runoff voting election on Nov 2009 and had the lowest voter turnout since 1902
-San Francisco's recent Mayoral election had the worst turnout in 35 years.
IRV has perverse results. In a statewide IRV contest for NC Court of Appeals, Thigpen had 100,000 lead in first round. He ended up losing the election even though in total he had more votes than any other candidate.
Oakland can thank instant runoff voting for Mayor Jean Quan's "reign of error"
Gimmicks don't work. Transparency does.
Our entire system is broken. Corporations have bought and paid for our government.
Media consolidation and no Fairness Doctrine means that a few wealthy people decide what most of the public sees or hears on OUR public airwaves.
This means that we have a mis-informed and dis-informed public who will vote against their own best interests.
If the objective of an election process is to discern the will of the voters, then that process must be the simplest, most transparent and most enfranchising method for all voters.
November 27, 2011 8:58am
Readers be warned that Joyce McCloy (above) is a well-known IRV opponent who trolls comment boards to disparage IRV, even though almost every university professor who studies elections will tell you that is a superior system than the current voting system (which MORE often suffers from both "low turnout" and "perverse results" -- both Joyce's pseudo-arguments against IRV). IRV is designed to solve a critical design flaw in our current system, and that is the "spoiler effect" (aka "vote-splitting"). The fact that Joyce fails to mention this fundamental argument, and fails to mention that there are many examples of IRV (or Proportional Representation) around the nation and world which are hailed as profound successes, reveals her long-standing bias against actually "educating" anyone on this reform. Successes include: Portland, Maine this month; Cambridge, MA for over 41 years; Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN; Australia to elect members of Parliament for about 100 years; Ireland to elect their President for about 100 years; London to elect mayor; and on and on.
The other, bigger issue that Joyce is never honest about is that EVERY voting system has mathematical flaws and weaknesses. There is no perfect system, and this is why mathematicians have been debating different voting systems for centuries. Therefore, let's experiment with any system that is better than our current primitive plurality system. IRV is one of the most promising, field-tested reforms, and it solves the problem of voter preference far better than what we have. Let's get real, Joyce.
July 01, 2012 6:15pm
What is wrong with the commenting section for this article, first of all???
And 2nd, thank you, Adam, for refuting Joyce's comments. IRV , also known as Ranked Choice Voting is a perfectly fine system of voting. The real problem is though is that we have allowed specific corporations to gain power over the software that ALL of our voting activities instead of keeping this very important aspect of our decision making in the public realm.
Another aspect of our election process that is in need of reform in states nationwide is the practice of straight party ticket voting. Here in NM we have seen this eliminated for the time being but being challenged by state Democrats who used this as a cash cow for keeping their people in power by making voting so simple the electorate isn't required to even think. This is dangerous. WHile it is perfectly valid to mark the box for straight party and then go down to specific races and vote for whomever you want even if that candidate is of a different party, this was not well publicized intentionally. Hence, for one important race in NM, well-qualified Green party candidates were defeated by a (D) candidate who was not only unqualified but was convicted of wrong-doing that occurred even during their campaigns, not once, but TWICE!! Two bozos were elected for PRC Commissioner because of the desire to make voting a team-following sport instead of a civic duty.
We should be voting for candidates, not parties, when we go to the polls and thinking and examination of those candidates should be encouraged, not lazy and ignorant "Happy Meal Voting."
November 17, 2011 9:58am
A few other ideas:
Members should have to sign statement under penalty of perjury that they have read a piece of legislation before it is voted on.
Congress should have to pass a test on each piece of legislation again that a citizens council has developed based on READING the legislation and constructing an exam to ensure representatives have READ and understand the bill.
All private money must be eliminated from the electoral process. A $50 tax would produce a public funded kitty of $6B per election cycle. See "More Money Can Beat Big Money" by Lawrence Lessig Nov 16, 2011 NYT. I am not sure I agree with his proposed voucher system but rather think funds should be apportioned based on head counts in congressional jurisdictions.
The revolving door from K street to Wall Street to Washington needs to be closed. An appropriate waiting period say 10 years should be imposed before one can move from a government, public service role into direct employment as a lobbyist, or an industry affiliated with their former government duties.
Citizens United should be essentially gutted through legislation.
No television advertising, period. All television, radio, cable, internet providers/networks are licensed and have a great deal of their existence provided via the American taxpayer. They should be required to hold debates, individual candidate half hour to an hour discussions on their proposed visions and public submitted key issues. Same for radio, and the internet should have one clearing house site with side by side position papers of each candidate.
Term Limits for all local, state and federal offices. Perhaps to mitigate this again a waiting period of 10 years before one can assume office.
All members of Congress must have their personal investments in a blind "rabbi" investment trust with NO personal direction on their part until they return to private life.
Congress should be mandated to select or promote candidates that represent the country's actual constituency (ie, if there are 5 % doctors, 20% teachers, 10% home builders etc) the body should look more like America. Most of the Congress is composed of lawyers with an inordinate amount of Harvard and Yale representation. Legal assistance groups can assist non-lawyer types in drafting legislation.
Frankly, I think we could do better by having a random lottery of average citizens selected each cycle.
November 17, 2011 9:24am
I applaud your efforts at putting a concrete list of ideas together to address our legislative system. However, I wonder if we need to start with a blank or clean sheet of paper and redesign from the ground up and not merely provide band-aids to a significantly wounded patient.
I believe that perhaps we have entered an era where true participatory democracy is available via the internet, cell phones, texting etc. We have the technology to put all issues via referendum or legislation to a direct vote by the people.
I sense in your "paper" ballot comments perhaps skepticism that the suggestion above would be corrupted. However, that risk could be mitigated by control mechanisms and independent citizen advisory boards that oversee voting outcomes. Similar to the jury duty system, pools of ever day citizens could be selected on each referendum to oversee results.
We could all be issued a device similar to a cell phone but not corporate controlled, perhaps in the hands of the GAO to vote 1 yes 2 for no. Again independent rotating citizen boards would be selected to verify results.
I have not thought through all the details, but I am consistently amazed at public opinion polls on specific issues how much the country generally has a majority consensus. Yet, Congress does the exact opposite.
It is time for the government truly to be of and for the people.
November 16, 2011 1:24pm
[Edit: This page has been updated and corrected. Many thanks to the moderators and editors!!!!]
The proposal originally reproduced on this page was falsely attributed to Robert Steele. The People Before Parties document is in fact a proposal of the Politics and Electoral Reform working group at Occupy Wall Street in NYC. That document can be found in its entirety at the working group's page on the NYC General Assembly's website:
http://www.nycga.net/groups/political-and-electoral-reform/docs/people-b...
It would be greatly appreciated if Nation of Change would correct this serious error of attribution as soon as possible.
November 16, 2011 1:23pm
...
November 11, 2011 7:11pm
Good article. Good ideas.
Two party system is a manipulative mind trip on the masses, no doubt. Some Scary Country...
Sing-a-long:
doctorsparkles.com/audio/DOCTOR_SPARKLES-Scary_Countr.mp3
November 10, 2011 3:25pm
As I see it the only answer to providing accountability in the American voting system is to establish a very large third party. I feel this is already underway. Think of the dozens and dozens of Occupy sites as campaign offices. If all movements Climate, tax fairness. etc put their top issues on simmer and affiliate with with the Occupy movement to form a 99% Political Party they could easily attract 50% of the 99%. If the folks spending the winter and other volunteers canvassed their local neighbor hoods and and educated the rest of the 99% there would be more than enough to out vote both parties. Of course no donations from corporations would be used. The platform would be based on the 99% Declaration's List of 20 GRIEVANCES or some thing very similar. It's time to bring Politics into the 21st Century. Contact stevenjsteigerwald @gmail .com formore info.
November 15, 2011 12:29pm
I quite agree. Canada has had a multy party system throuhout most of its history. Many though, now are talking about proportional representation to replace the first past the post system of voting that too often leads to majority governments, that are voted in by less that half of all voters. Canada too is seeing an increasing drop off of the number of those who vote.