As a result of my video entries to the Looking at Democracy contest, the following message came to my Common Lot website:
Here was our Looking At Democracy contest entry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=db6Syys2fmE
… I’d like to devote the rest of my life to democracy reform. The legislative jury idea is one I’m quite fond of. Feel free to join our discussion forum and share your thoughts. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/electionscience
The Center for Election Science
In their score voting/asset page I find these statements:
There is no other voting system in the world, which is simultaneously
- this simple and
Indeed, arguably nothing else even comes close. And if you want a system that
- can be used on “dumb” voting machines,
- is “proportional,” and
- involves voting for people (not “voting for parties” which is what “party list” PR systems instead involve)
then again, Asset arguably has zero competition.
I have been focusing on insuring legislative proportionality via use of sortition. But when it comes to the executive, I can only imagine continued use of elections.
I wonder if other Kleroterians are of the same opinion? And, if so, is this ‘asset voting’ the most equitable means?