Left In Lowell

More Arguments for Choice Voting

8 Responses to “More Arguments for Choice Voting”

1. Eleanor Rigby Says:
   October 29th, 2009 at 10:04 pm

   With the lack of coverage that the Sun refuses to provide, people not directly involved in the election are not going to vote.

   That means that there will not be enough ballots cast to pass the question even if it is approved by a majority of voters which I believe is unlikely.

   Victoria accuses me of OBSESSING about district representation and points out that only 10 percent of voters would approve each district representative.

   I say she is right! I am as strongly committed to City Council representation for neighborhoods as she is of Choice representation by choice of the city council.

   Oh? Didn’t anyone notice that according to the ONELowell petition the Lowell City Council decides the rules of the Choice Voting?

   So….As a City Councilor I say Belvidere, Upper Highlands and Pawtucktetville precints are counted first!!!

   Then, if there are still open seats we’ll bring in some of the other wards.

   Victoria, you have pointed out that district representation would also elect councilors with only 10% of the vote and you are right, however what you fail to acknowledge is that each neighborhood would have a representative on the council…something that is not the case now and is only “hopefully” the case under your proposal.

   I applaud you and your group for bringing this issue to voters, I just wish that it were a different alternative.

   Respectfully
   ER

2. Felicia Says:
   October 30th, 2009 at 6:53 am

   First a disclaimer — I work at ONE Lowell.

   I don’t know why folks keep referring to districts. It’s not an option this election and between what we have now and a system that my gets at representation better, I choose Choice Voting. Not a surprise given my affiliation.

   But I’ve also been thinking that in a representative democracy, all we have are our representatives. And in an increasingly complex society, more than just geography defines us. In fact, the pull of place is becoming increasing challenged by our communities of interest. For me, Choice Voting allows for candidates that could to speak to our community of place and our communities of interest. It just seems like a much more flexible system for the kind of society we have today.

   And as to Eleanor Rigby’s post, not sure where the idea that some neighborhoods would get counted first and take up all of the seats. The system doesn’t work that way. It is a misreading.

3. Anonymous Says:
   October 30th, 2009 at 7:11 am

   ….5 more days:)

4. waittilnextyr Says:
   October 30th, 2009 at 9:55 am

   Ranked voting is not only more fair, but it is a natural way to vote for multiple choices. It is more fair because it prevents the majority from loading up the city council using 9 full votes to elect 9 specific people. This is of particular concern when a significant minority of voters go to the polls, as it allows special interests to control the election, and therefore our government. That is not how a democratic city council should be formed, but rather it should be 9 independent persons, each voting for the citizens as a whole. And if not 9 independent persons, at least 9 persons who collectively are independent.

   It should be very easy for the voters to understand how to rank their selections and complete the ballot accordingly. What is more complex is how the votes are counted, and the entrenched interests are taking advantage of that complexity to create uncertainty in the minds of the voters, sometimes by spreading misinformation (such as your vote may be transferred to someone you didn’t select). If your number 1 selection passes the threshold and is declared elected (you get one person in), then your second selection now gets a reduced weight vote to try to get him over the threshold for election, and once he reaches that (your second person in), or is eliminated, then your third selection will now get a further weighted vote. The point is only candidates that you vote for will get a vote (or poretion thereof) from you.

   So, don’t let the scare tactics and uncertainty force you into a bad decision. Question 1 is an opportunity to break special interest control of our city council and achieve a more democratic representation in our local politics.

5. Peter Rollins Says:
   October 30th, 2009 at 2:55 pm

   There already is choice voting, only vote for one candidate, or 2 or 3. There’s no law that says you HAVE to vote for 9, it dilutes the votes for the candidates you support. Find the people you like best (in my case 1 guy) and vote only for them. That’s what Peter rollins does. And you can take that to the polls!

6. waittilnextyr Says:
   October 30th, 2009 at 7:40 pm

   Sorry, Peter but that does little to prevent other groups from loading up on a slate to dominate the election.

7. Right in Lowell Says:
   November 2nd, 2009 at 7:38 pm

   I’ll say upfront that I had no plans to vote yes on question 1. I don’t think it’s the answer. If I was going to vote in favor of it, they would have just lost my vote. I got an automatic call from One Lowell telling me how wonderful the program is and that I should vote for it. The kicker is that the caller ID was from Community Teamwork. I immediately called the number and spoke to a guy who was very rude and said he had no idea why that was the caller ID. “Must have been an old CTI #”… yeah right! CTI phones have no business being used by One Lowell to promote their agenda.

8. Right in Lowell Says:
   November 2nd, 2009 at 7:50 pm

   Forgot to mention that I asked to speak with Victoria and he hung up on me.

Leave a Reply