[Inside Government] Electoral Proposal Mired in Controversy






Electoral Proposal Mired in Controversy
The ‘Presidential Approval Voting Amendment Act’ Stirs Debate

Written by Le Libertie



Some say it’s an all too familiar pattern of lofty legislation proposed in the Senate. Others argue that it was a well-intentioned idea with some semblance of promise. But whatever the perspective, the discussions and debate of the last few days make one thing clear: the ‘Presidential Approval Voting Amendment Act’ has been surrounded in controversy.

On August 11, Senator Calvin Coolidge proposed the ‘Presidential Approval Voting Amendment Act’ on the Senate floor. Its purpose was “to take the approval voting system that we have put in place for Senate elections and attach it to the presidential system as well.” The currently-used two-round system for presidential elections operates where voters cast a single vote for their desired candidate in the first round. If no candidate earns a majority share of the vote tally, then a secondary run-off would proceed between the candidates with the two highest shares. Instead of this traditionally-used model for single-seat elections, Senator Calvin’s proposal would allow voters to cast their votes for any number of candidates. The winner would then be the most ‘approved’ candidate.

While the Senate began tentatively discussing the merits of the proposal, a parallel discussion branched out into the Grand Hall. Common-Sense Politics (CSP), the creator of that new thread, questioned “the motivation behind doing this” and asked if “there [is] a problem that we're seeking to fix”. Calvin replied that his proposal “offers a better system of voting” by fostering presidents “that more people approve of” and argued that it would put “tickets in a position where they have to draw a contrast on a number of issues”. Soon, an ensuing cycle of back-and-forth occurred between the minority of those who continued to see promise in the idea and those who opposed the legislation.

The principal argument of the majority who criticized the proposal centered around the premise that no change to the current method to presidential voting was necessary and that the proposal’s consequences did not match its intentions. Lloenflys maintained that “this system eliminates depth of support in favor of a "least objectionable" system,” with others such as Drecq, Sopo, and Forilian seconding this opinion among others. SkyGreen posited that Calvin’s proposal could be potentially successful, using a model to support his perspective. But others such as Senate Senator Malashaan, Speaker GraVandius, and Justice Prim contested the accuracy of his stated model and gave pushback against the proposal.

Another round of terse discussion began following the posting of strongly-worded criticism by Drecq, prompting an arraignment by HEM over what he saw as its excessively harsh tone. And after CSP posted a parody proposal mocking on what he saw as “a pattern of nonsense” in some of the recent ideas discussed in the region, others such as Le Libertie, Calvin, and HEM pushed back in varying degrees.

Eventually, a large majority of those participating in the conversation regarding the proposal solidified their disapproval. Back in the Senate, Calvin conceded that his proposal was likely to fail and it was promptly tabled. With the act now shelved in Senatia and the discussion in the Grand Hall dying down, it is almost certain that the ‘Presidential Approval Voting Amendment Act’ will rest as another unsuccessful proposal.
 
Calvin's getting so much hate lately he should consider changing his name to Herbert Hoover.
 
This was a very good write up! I particularly liked the narrative style you used.
 
Back
Top