Different uses for voting
need different types of voting.
Voting rules for setting policies; Condorcet rules

Policy Voting Notes

Rules for fair-share spending

Stability Is Not Rigidity

Some theorists have argued recently that the political balance should be poised on a knife edge, set to change quickly because policies must evolve by trial and error.  In their view, a central compromise is often 1 of the worst policies because it fails to resolve an issue's urgent decisions.

But while policy flip flops give new programs a chance to be tried, such brief, haphazard changes are not valid experiments.  A balanced council should let each side test its program on the issue or constituency where it has its strongest support.  Policies can evolve smoothly, although we rarely notice as it happens.

Combining agenda rules with preference ballots will require experience and judgement. Democracy needs a few groups to begin that experiment. A good synthesis would improve daily decisions by hundreds of councils.

If old rules of order are used when there is no ruling majority, they can lead to an increase in deadlocks and in poison-pill or free-rider amendments. Some legislators fear this result, particularly those accustomed to ruling majorities. Those are common problems in U.S. legislatures with open majorities.

Ensemble elections also lead to open majorities. So some reps might demand new agenda rules for preference ballots before they will consider using ensemble elections. Preference ballots that offer reps a full-choice can split poison-pill or free-rider amendments from constructive proposals. Condorcet Tallies can avoid deadlocks — unless a majority rank “None of the above” higher than all other proposals. Other policy rules

español Chinese

Search Accurate Democracy