Introducing the Split Vote System
"[American legislatures] should be an exact portrait, in miniature,
of the people at large, as it should think, feel, reason, and act like
them." -John AdamsIn a recent Elway Poll, 42 percent of
Americans felt that they were either represented in our government
"poorly" or "not at all". The cause of such sentiments is fairly
straight forward: almost half of Americans are in fact not represented
in our government. Our ancient voting system is designed to only ensure
representation for a majority of voters in a particular geographic
area. Most Americans have become so accustomed to our system of voting
that they its just "the way democracy works". They are mistaken.Our congressional elections use what electoral engineers call the single-member district plurality system.However,
most everyone else prefers to use the more succulent name, "the winner
takes all system". We are all familiar with the drawbacks of this
system. Whether you are a Democrat who lives in Alabama, or a
Republican who lives in Massachusetts, you are above all an American
who is without a voice in Government. The good news is that there are
alternatives to the winner-takes-all-system. In fact, most democratic
countries have already replaced our antique system with newer system:
proportional representation.I propose a unique breed of
proportional representation which I suppose could be called "the two
member district proportonally split-vote system". However, lets just
call it the "split vote system" . To begin, every district would be
given two seats to represent the majority and minority factions. Thus,
our House of Representatives would expand to 870 seats. The two Representatives would not have equal votes in congress. Rather, they
would split one vote to mirror the outcome of the election. Thus, if a
candidate won 51% of the popular vote they would receives 51% of the
district's vote. This system would end the practice of gerrymandering.
More importantly, it would also better protect the interests of
minority factions.Another peculiar aspect of this system is
that it doesn't grant an equal vote to every district. Instead, the
weight of a districts vote is proportional to the amount of registered
voters who participated in an election. Thus, if only 38 percent of a
district's citizens participate in a congressional election, than the
two elected representatives will split 38/100 of their district's vote.
In such a system, not a single citizen would be able to say, "My vote
doesn't matter."This system has quite a few advantages. The
additional seats to the House would increase the responsiveness of
representatives to their constituents. Furthermore, the additional
representatives insure that the voice of the minority isn't silenced by
the mere fact that a partisan majority's candidate won 51% of the
popular vote. Congressional candidates will be encouraged to reach out
to as many diverse groups of as possible. This is in contrast to our
current system, which allows candidates to win by using wedge issues to
encourage groups whose vote is easily controlled, while making the rest
apathetic. In the proposed system, a strategy designed to make voters
apathetic or polarized will result in less power for not only the
representatives, but also for citizens of the district.Perhaps
the greatest strength of this proposal is its realistic approach toward
people and power. Since the power of a representative's vote is
dependent on how many people participate, citizens will feel a greater
obligation to vote. Rather than merely encouraging citizens to "rock
the vote", the proposed system will make it clear that the entire
community will suffer if they don’t vote. While latter has always been
true, this proposed system will make it clear in concrete terms. Non-voting
will no longer default power to the winner of an election. Instead, a
non-voter will default their entire community's power over national
affairs. Best of all, it avoids the institution of fines for
non-voting, such as the mandatory participation laws in Australia.
Instead, it exploits the natural power of social pressure when an
entire community's voice is at stake.Moreover, the splitting of
a vote between two candidates will fundamentally alter American
politics for the better. An effective campaign strategy would have to
attempt to build as many bridges between diverse interests as possible.
Candidates would not only be rewarded for capturing the imagination of
the voters in their district; they'd be punished for concentrating on
divisive issues like abortion or gun control. While many activists
would cringe at the loss of attention toward those problems, our ailing
democracy would breath a sigh of relief.