This week, the Libertarian Party of California joined the ProRep Coalition, which seeks to have the California legislature elected through a proportional representation voting system.This was [covered](https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2023/09/state-libertarians-join-coalition-for-proportional-representation-in-california/) on Independent Political Report.Thanks! This week, the Libertarian Party of California joined the ProRep Coalition, which seeks to have the California legislature elected through a proportional representation voting system.This was [covered](https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2023/09/state-libertarians-join-coalition-for-proportional-representation-in-california/) on Independent Political Report.Thanks! NONPARTISAN EXECS/JUDICS Are a bad idea.Are there any specifics on how this would work? “Proportional representation” is a very broad term.

The article didn’t provide much detail about the actual proposal.I think they actually meant to join the PrEP coalition in support of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV.

This proposal came close to being defeated by HIV positive party members who advocated joining the PEP (post exposure prophylaxis) coalition instead.What format of PR do they want to use? PR – PRE-ELECTION CANDIDATE RANK ORDER LISTS OF ALL OTHER CANDS IN ALL DISTS TOTAL VOTES/TOTAL MEMBERS = EQUAL VOTES TO ELECT EACH MEMBER HIGHEST SURPLUS – DOWN – REPEAT LOWEST LOSER – UP – REPEAT ALL VOTES COUNT.

[https://www.prorepcoalition.org](https://www.prorepcoalition.org) CA PR GROUP [https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/08/politics/nancy-pelosi-reelection-house-seat/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/08/politics/nancy-pelosi-reelection-house-seat/index.html) EVIL COMMIE WICKED WITCH OF THE WEST ??? WHERE IS DOROTHY OF WIZARD OF OZ ??? ANY TORNADOS IN SF AREA ??? I doubt any of the groups promoting Proportional Representation have a specific plan.The goal right now is to make people aware that a system exists which might make legislative bodies more representative, including providing that minorities – political or otherwise – will have a chance to be represented.After it looks like significant number of people are receptive, then more concrete ideas can be proposed.Go away commie Berkman.

These generic reform proposals tend to gain rather fuzzy support, that usually goes nowhere.IMO, this is due to the fact that there isn’t a specific reform proposal that people can actually grasp and consider.If these guys need an idea, I offer two proposals that could lead to more proportional representation in Congress: 1.A minimum Congressional district size of 1,000 square miles, which would result in many metro areas having multi-member districts, which is what you need to get to proportional representation.

2.Adopt the Wyoming Rule to expand the size of the US House by 100+ members.This would result in more reps per state, and more reps per multi-member district, which also advances more proportional representation.

SEPARATE USA/STATE DEFINITIONS OF ELECTORS/VOTERS.TV/TM = PR IN ALL REGIMES.EACH REP DIST = 1 OR MORE FED AREAS OR PART OF 1 FED AREA.CONTIGUOUS IF POSSIBLE – IE BIT SPECIAL FOR HI, 1 STATE REPS, DC AND USA COLONIES.

ABOLISH MINORITY RULE USA SENATE AND 12 AMDT EC AZ is lying.Lots of people and groups support proportional representation.Very few if any support his bizarre cockamamie scheme of forcing candidates to rank all other candidates as a condition of running.I want more wind farms! AZ’s plan sounds fucking retarded.I would choose the Max Plan over his.

Abolishing the Senate and Electoral college are two more terrible ideas.The reason PR and various such other plans don’t gain much steam is because very few voters care.That’s not going to change.Voters care about concrete issues that visibly impact their lives – taxes, education, crime, immigration, etc.Election administration methods are just not on most voters radar.

Secondly, as fringe niche interests, election method change advocacy groups attract people who are nitpickers, dividers, and perfectionists, not very prone to compromise, more prone to one upsmanship and escalating disagreements and being king of the hill.With the lack of success comes frustration and turning on each other or loss or waning of interest.So, it’s not surprising that these groups never get off the ground or make much headway, splinter, fade, etc.A whale who supports wind farms would be suicidal, as well as a monster who wants to kill all the other whales.Ken is correct.

@AZ, This is about the California Legislature, not the governor.I do not believe you are in favor of a parliamentary form of government.No? Walter Ziobro: “Are there any specifics on how this would work? ‘Proportional representation’ is a very broad term.The article didn’t provide much detail about the actual proposal.” Great question.I (Felix Ling) serve on the board of directors of ProRep Coalition and as a registered Libertarian who co-chaired the ad hoc Alternative Voting Committee of the national LP in 2021, I was also part of the small team that made the pitch to the LPCA.We are currently in the coalition-building and education phase and are likely several years away from the point where we’d be writing the actual ballot initiative.While we all have our favorite Proportional Representation (ProRep) methods (my personal fave is the hybrid Mixed Member Proportional as used in Germany, New Zealand, and Taiwan), it will be the coalition members that ultimately decide which version of ProRep the initiative proposes (including the California chapters of the LP, Green Party, Peace & Freedom Party, etc.).If you are interested in contributing anything from labor to contacts or ideas, we still recruiting for our Advisory Board and of course anybody who is interested in volunteering or simply getting our newsletter.

You can see the current makeup of the Advisory Board at the bottom of this page, and you can hit the “Join Us” button in the upper right to get in touch.

[https://www.prorepcoalition.org/about/](https://www.prorepcoalition.org/about/) NOTA Z: “The reason PR and various such other plans don’t gain much steam is because very few voters care.That’s not going to change.Voters care about concrete issues that visibly impact their lives – taxes, education, crime, immigration, etc.Election administration methods are just not on most voters radar.” I won’t deny that this will certainly be a steep uphill battle, but much the same could have been said ten years ago for Ranked Choice Voting, a reform which started off in just the California Bay Area and now enjoys great momentum after being used in high-profile elections in NYC and Alaska (as well as being used by the Virginia GOP to select Youngkin, a candidate with broad enough appeal to beat the Democrat in the general election).ProRep just got its biggest victory last year when Portland, OR adopted it, and we are hopefully that it will bring ideological diversity to their governance (i.e., actually represent conservatives and others).

There is also a high profile national organization now promoting just specifically ProRep (FixOurHouse) whose co-founder, Lee Drutman, appears very frequently in high-profile national publications.FairVote is also firmly behind ProRep, being the organization that still hosts the Proportional Representation Library assembled by Douglas Amy (although they usually only talk about PRCV these days).

So, don’t count us out! I’ve been an electoral reform advocate for 20 years and never in a million years did I dream then that it would have made anywhere close to the progress it has already made in the US.I spent pretty much my entire Cato Internship in 2008 trying to convince folks of the need for electoral reform with absolutely nobody there willing to listen, and now they have a scholar, Walter Olson, who publicly advocates for reforms like RCV.But our biggest obstacle, of course, is the strength, power, and money behind the two-party duopoly, which is undoubtedly formidable.So, just decide for yourself if you’re with us or if you’re with them.I don’t have anything against you.You seem like a decent family man from the photo on your site.But there’s nothing about the make-up of that board that suggests you will raise the millions of dollars that it costs to qualify a California ballot initiative or the tens of millions it typically costs to win the pro and con ad war to pass one.

RCV hasn’t passed in California either.

It hasn’t made the ballot there, as far as I know.There’s nothing to suggest proportional representation will either.

RCV passed in Maine because the left got together behind it full force due to LePage and Cutler, and in Alaska piggybacking off Top X.Those are lower population states with less costly ballot issues.I’m not with you or with them.I’d like to see the Max plan, but that’s even way more remote than PR.

About the only realistic thing I’m for is defeating the dims and leftards.When Trump takes his second Presidential oath of office I’ll be happier.

If you get proportional representation in the California legislature…well, my hunch is it would have to be after you get it statewide in other states, unless you somehow get buy in from the legislature and no veto.And if it does not benefit their party, you won’t.Spoken like a Republican, which is part of the duopoly last time I checked.I’m not a member of any party.I’ve supported Republicans, American Independents, Libertarians, Reform Party/Independent, and Constitution Party for President.All those plus even Democrats (none recently) for other offices.

Trump also ran Reform Party, and has been registered Democrat, Independent / Independence and Reform as well as Republican.I’m with Trump, and the GOP only gets my support when they nominate good candidates like Trump, who doesn’t bow to any party or duopoly.

In fact he still holds out the possibility of running third party if the GOP were to not nominate him.This group appears to be concentrating on the California Legislature.Discussion about the executive, judiciary, Congress, and the electoral college is misplaced.California has a large population and a small legislature.Each senator represents nearly a million residents.

If you used STV in 5-member districts then each district would have nearly 5 million persons.There is also the issue that AZ alluded to, large variation in the electorate among districts.SD-24 has 687K registered voters, SD-14 has 428K registered voters, a 1.61 : 1.00 disparity.

Unless you let votes flow between districts it will result in a legislature that is geographically malapportioned.Statewide party lists will lead to a lack connection between voters and their senators and representatives.

A unicameral assembly would have 341 members.If you had 5-member districts they would have 580K per district.They could share a district office, with most of the staff performing clerical duties.Rather than transferring votes between candidates and districts, use weighted voting.If a candidate gets 147,316 votes, they exercises that many votes in the legislature.

Limiting voting to districts limits any assemblymember from having excessive power.Districts could be semi-permanent.For example, Tulare County would nominally be apportioned 4.11 members but that would vary based on actual turnout and population growth.

Los Angeles County would nominally be entitled to 83.76 members, and could be divided into around 17 districts based on population.The city of Los Angeles could be further subdivided, Long Beach could be entitled to 3.98 members, and other cities combined in a single district (e.g.Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena).Yeah, they’re not going to get the kind of money it takes for a California ballot initiative, much less to pass it, based on esoteric arguments about how to elect the state legislature.Who’s going to shell out millions of dollars for that? I’d say split up California into multiple states.That probably won’t happen either.Maybe the easiest reform to pass would be if the rest of the states vote them out of the Union.

The USA would be immediately better off.No surprise, Felix Ling is a commie.He sounds like an Ogle clone.

They’d both be out of the USA if we kick CA out.JR- ROTTED TO THE CORE PARL REGIMES– FATAL BRITS IN EARLY 1700S >>> TYRANT BRITS IN 1760S-1770S >>> USA AM REV WAR HITLER PARL REGIME – FATAL TO 80 MILLION.BRAIN DEAD EUROS – KEEPING PARL REGIMES.ALSO IN ROTTED CANADA / INDIA / ETC.— 1/2 OR LESS VOTES X 1/2 RIGGED CRACKED/PACKED GERRYMANDER DISTS = 1/4 OR LESS CONTROL TOP 2 CA PRIMARY = MORE ROT MORE NONVOTES – ESP IF 2 D OR 2 R IN GERRYMANDER DIST IN GENL ELECTION MAIN RESULT OF ALL THE MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDERS = LAWLESS TYRANT EXECS AND LAWLESS TYRANT COURTS — USURPING THE LEGIS BODIES — PR APPV TOTSOP FPOR ANY NON-TROLL MORONS- MORE FOR NON-TROLL MORONS [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering) AREA FIXATION SINCE FOREVER- ESP SINCE OLDE BRIT HOUSE OF COMMONS G DISTS IN LATE 1200S.- 700 PLUS YEARS OF BRIT ROT – MINORITY RULE HC TOTALLY ROTTED BY 1775-1776 – MANY/MOST G DISTS CONTROLLED BY KG3 / LORDS LESS MINORITY RULE SINCE 1832 GREAT REFORM ACT AND LATER ACTS.BRAIN DEAD FAILURE OF LIBDEMS TO FORCE PR AFTER 2010 ELECTION – LD/CONS COALITION.

UK FACING COMMIE LABOUR TAKEOVER- PROBABLE END OF MONARCHY.

— PR – PART OF P-A-T I don’t know what AZ is babbling about but I’m zero percent Puerto Rican and whether California legislature gets elected by proportional representation or not is not going to kill 6 million Jews or 6 million anybody.

Now AZZ can get back to screaming crazy nonsense.TROLL MORONS LOVE MINORITY RULE IN LEGIS BODIES AND RESULTING TYRANT MONARCHS AND COURTS.IT SHOWS IN A-L-L 0.

666 IQ POSTS.—- DAMN ALL TROLL MORONS.FULL SPEED AHEAD TO REAL DEMOCRACY.REMEMBER BATTLE OF MOBILE BAY IN CIVIL WAR I.Real democracy is real communist, absolute zero iq troll moron AZ.JR wrote: “California has a large population and a small legislature.” Absolutely.PR or not, California has a legislature that is WAY too small.

For PR, you would definitely need a bigger legislature..