Skip to main content

Yesterday's party affiliation announcement by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has sent the blogs, the MSM, and political junkies everywhere into a frenzy of speculation.  Having been a life-long Democrat prior to his Republican conversion makes both sides nervous, and will likely send every 2008 Presidential campaign back to their strategy discussions.

Will Bloomberg draw more votes from Republican voters, with whom he has been more recently allied? Or will his Democratic history and liberal leanings on some issues disproportionately siphon frustrated moderates away from the Democratic nominee?  No one knows, and the only certain thing is that his personal wealth allows him to mount a credible candidacy without any party backing.

With his net worth estimated at $5B, a Bloomberg presidential candidacy is a curve ball to both sides, presenting risks that neither party quite knows how to manage.  And in that uncertainty lies a hidden opportunity that progressives should recognize and embrace.  More on the flip...

Two important voter reforms favored by progressives just might be viable in the context of a Bloomberg candidacy.  Namely, Instant Runoff Voting and Public Campaign Financing.  Let's take the easier one first...

Public campaign financing, sometimes referred to as "Clean Elections", is major reform that would completely change the election finance system.  An organization called Public Campaign says that:

Clean Elections is a practical, proven reform that puts voters in control of elections. Rather than being forced to rely on special interest donors to pay for their campaigns, candidates have the opportunity to qualify for full public funding which ends their reliance on special interest campaign cash. Being freed from the money chase means they have more time to spend with constituents, talking about issues that matter to them. When they enter office, they can consider legislation on the merits, without worrying about whether they are pleasing well heeled donors and lobbyists.

Republicans generally hate this idea since it neutralizes their traditional fund raising advantage over Democrats.  It also violates their "principle" of limited government, but we all know they are willing to jettison their principles when acquisition of power is at stake.  With 2008 shaping up to favor the Democrats in fund raising, and with the terrifying prospect of Michael Bloomberg spending a billion dollars to lure Republican voters, there is a unique opportunity.  If there was ever a time to persuade Republicans that this reform is in their best interests, that time is now.

Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) encourages third-party candidacies by allowing voters to rank the candidates in order of preference.  Here is how it works:

In an IRV election, if no candidate receives an overall majority of first preferences, the candidates with fewest votes are eliminated one by one, and their votes transferred according to their second and third preferences (and so on) and all votes retallied, until one candidate achieves a majority.

You want to vote for Ralph Nader in 2000?  Fine.  Assuming that Al Gore would be your second choice, we end up with a Gore Presidency under an IRV system.  Why would Republicans agree to go along with this idea?  Because a Bloomberg candidacy threatens to put them at the wrong end of the sword. The idea that a third party candidacy could swing the election to a Democrat echoes a nightmare from the past.  Many Republicans believe that Bill Clinton was elected because Ross Perot took more Republican votes than Democratic votes, so this is a very real threat to them.

What makes Instant Runoff Voting more difficult is that the Constitution governs how our presidential elections are run, and an IRV system would require either an amendment to the Constitution, or agreement by a sufficient number of states to select their electors based on national instant runoff results.  A Constitutional amendment is always an uphill battle, and recent efforts to implement a "popular vote" system for electing the President has been unable to coordinate the states in selecting their electors.

But neither of these obstacles should dissuade progressives from pushing for IRV at the state level and for Congressional elections.

For more reading on these reforms, see:

instantrunoff.com
publicampaign.org
HR 3099 from 2005

Now is the time to push!

Originally posted to SBucher on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:58 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  billion dollar curveball? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    N in Seattle, Greasy Grant

    Oh, at first I thought you were talking about the value of a single pitch by Roger Clemens...

    oops. I hope the gate wasn't too expensive.

    The Nexus has you.

    by Dante Atkins on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 03:57:11 PM PDT

  •  This only works if he really is ready (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    inclusiveheart

    to part with $800 Millon to run a credible 3rd party campaign.  Bonddad's diary tells you from where his support will come.  

    Attn: James Nicholson is still Sec. of VA. There is no excuse for that. Thankyouverymuch

    by llbear on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:02:12 PM PDT

  •  thanks for posting this!!!! (0+ / 0-)

    there are many of us looking for ways to put the muscle back into the body politic... this one has potential, although i can hear the naysayers now...

    thank you soooooo much for posting a diary with a concrete way in which citizens can assert themselves as the fourth branch of gov't

    this is certainly worth looking into!!!

    warm regards and rec'd... pf8

    "Well we don't rent pigs and I figure it's better to say it right out front because a man that does like to rent pigs is... he's hard to stop" Gus McCrae

    by pfiore8 on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:05:49 PM PDT

    •  Thanks much! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pfiore8

      Neither of these ideas are going to help us win 2008 elections, but I consider the battle to take back our politics to be a long-term effort.  And I think these are desperately needed reforms.

      •  maybe something more... (0+ / 0-)

        DROP THE BOMB: it's time

        i wrote the diary above Sunday and just added a link to your diary in it.

        i am thinking it might be a good idea to write a weekly/biweekly/monthly? diary asking for ideas, the looking at them, putting them together, and seeing what can be done, what people would be willing to do...

        kind of organize it... mind you, not the organizing type, but want to do something to get a catalogue and, well the only way i keep thinking about it is an armchair approach: something people can easily do... even if requires some sacrifice.

        maybe take a look and then let me know what you think. but we'd need several of us and maybe enlist some of the lawyers and econ types here to help us vet some of these things...

        raw stage, but let me know

        thanks... pf8

        "Well we don't rent pigs and I figure it's better to say it right out front because a man that does like to rent pigs is... he's hard to stop" Gus McCrae

        by pfiore8 on Wed Jun 20, 2007 at 04:24:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site