Why We Love The Fair Representation Act

Testimonials from a February 2020 gathering at NYU on the Fair Representation Act
Voices include (in order):
Kevin Johnson, Election Reformers Network Executive Director
Pedro Hernandez, FairVote Senior Policy Coordinator
Sangita Sigdyal, FairVote Executive Vice President
Danielle Allen, Harvard University Professor
George Cheung, More Equitable Democracy Director
Cynthia Terrell, RepresentWomen Executive Director
David Daley, FairVote Senior Fellow, author of the books Ratf*****: The True Story Behind the Secret Plan to Steal America's Democracy and Unrigged: How Americans Are Battling Back to Save Democracy
Chris Hughes, Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center Policy Director
Nick Troiano, Unite America Executive Director
Neal Simon, Retired Business Executive and Author
Rob Richie, FairVote CEO and President

[@apachon]

This is a good system .

[@ernest3286]

RCV: It ain't sexy, but it would go a long way toward a better and less divided political system.

[@adanieltorres]

I support this, as is, though I would add that citizens be allowed optionally to vote in any or every vote in which a government representative votes, and the value of the vote of the representative gets reduced proportionally to people who cast their vote directly.

[@secularsekai8910]

We need to do this. Our country is becoming a political cesspool of uncompromising, party-based circus theatrics…..

[@theyoungcentrist9110]

I still think Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) would be a better way to elect US Representatives & for the overall country to be better reflected; simply because it’s far more simple & can bring a sense of bipartisanship and collaboration back to Washington.

[@zacharybrand8145]

Single Transferable Vote is a better Proportional Representation election system!

[@barnacles1352]

Its not constituitional. Stv is the closest to constituitionality

[@theyoungcentrist9110]

@@zacharybrand8145 The problem with STV as CGP grey talked about in one of the videos; is that if you have one big district with 9 seats you can than have 90-100 candidates running for that office. That will be a lot of work for the voter to rank all of the candidates in order preference.
The main reason why I support Mixed Member Proportional because it still maintains the idea of each district getting 1 representative, while it also brings party list representation so you can still have directly elected representatives & parties will be better reflected in the House based on the number of votes. MMP is much more simple to the average voter to understand how to vote.
I have a video talking about how MMP can be implemented in US House elections. Where in the first vote, you get to rank all of the candidates in order of your choice & whoever gets 50% or more of the total votes will be your local representative. While in the second vote, you vote for one party & how much votes a party receives will determine how many seats they get in the House. MMP in my opinion would be a much more simple way to achieve proportionality in the US House.

[@zacharybrand8145]

@@theyoungcentrist9110 Single Transferable Vote is better than Mixed Member Proportional Representation because STV is 100% candidate based and reduces the influence of political parties while giving people more choices. MMP requires political parties to operate. Our constitution dose not and should not lay any groundwork for political parties (Although it would be nice not to have political parties, It's not that I have anything against political parties).

[@zacharybrand8145]

@@barnacles1352 EXACTLY!

[@danielsykes7558]

5:55 🍪 feed many birds with one scone 🐦 🦜 🦚, 📱 free many birds with one phone ⛓, 🎶 trill many birds with one tone 🐦 🦃 🦉 🐥 🐔 🦅