If I've read a more perceptive, well-written, knowledgeable article on proportional representation/ranked-choice voting (P-RCV) recently, it doesn't come quickly to mind. Hill gives excellent explanations of P-RCV, of Portland's proposals, and specific examples of previous elections (Amarillo School Board, Florida 2000, etc.) where changes in election systems made (or could have made) important differences - such situations probably have been (and are) widespread. Yes, cities are multi-everything and - as Hill explains so well - our election systems need to give us elected candidates who better reflect this. Is it any wonder many "multi-everything" folks lose interest in voting?
If I've read a more perceptive, well-written, knowledgeable article on proportional representation/ranked-choice voting (P-RCV) recently, it doesn't come quickly to mind. Hill gives excellent explanations of P-RCV, of Portland's proposals, and specific examples of previous elections (Amarillo School Board, Florida 2000, etc.) where changes in election systems made (or could have made) important differences - such situations probably have been (and are) widespread. Yes, cities are multi-everything and - as Hill explains so well - our election systems need to give us elected candidates who better reflect this. Is it any wonder many "multi-everything" folks lose interest in voting?