Fusion Voting Bill [At Final Vote]

[Marokai Backbeat]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Hashemite

[Franzl]

To be honest, I don't really approve of this. I don't like increasing party influence.

[tmthforu94]

I see nothing wrong with this. Maybe we could change it to where it would list your actual party first, then below it could show something like, for example...

[  ] Tmthforu94
Independent, Supported by Jesus Christ Party, Democratic Alliance.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I don't really like this, mainly because as parties, all Atlasians really like to throw token endorsements around alot. SPC got several votes in our August convention for a 5th preference endorsement even though not alot of us really like him all that much and we only did it because we didn't know what to do for that spot.

Can any of you imagine SPC on the ballot with JCP by his name?

With the amount of endorsements thrown around for five positions in At-Large elections, we could be looking at every candidate having a ton of different party tags near their name. I don't see the use of that and I think it would needlessly complicating things.

People should spend their time campaigning and trying to get people's votes instead of trying to either deceive voters, or just baffle the voters with a ton of extra party tags. (And yes, I really do think that's why Hamilton likes the idea, it would screw things up.)

[Alexander Hamilton]

Well, no, actually. I was think more along the lines of endorsements for races that the party neglected to run a candidate in. For instance, Xahar could run as a JCP candidate in the Southeast. I don't think there would be a point to list a candidate endorsed for 5th preferences or something ridiculous like that LOL. I guess that might not be clear but this can obviously use some work.

That's one of the reasons I said the endorsement had to be approved by the chairman after voting, to stop things from getting ridiculous. I don't think there is anything wrong with what, say, New York has.

[Hash]

Perhaps this could be used only for non-STV elections with one candidate/party/office, you get my drift.

[Franzl]

Perhaps this could be used only for non-STV elections with one candidate/party/office, you get my drift.

That would be far better in my opinion.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Yes, perhaps this is best suited for single victor elections, namely President, Governor, Regional Senator, Lt. Governor, and Special Elections for At-large Seats.

[Hash]

Friendly amendment offered:

1. Any declared candidate for the offices of President, Governor, Regional Senator and Lt. Governor in the Republic of Atlasia may opt to appear on the ballot for all major parties offering the candidate an official endorsement.
2. Official endorsements by parties must be certified by the chairman of the party giving the endorsement.
3. The SoFA must be notified of the endorsement at least 5 days in advance by the declared candidate receiving a cross-endorsement.
4. This legislation also applies to special elections for at-large Senators.

[Хahar 🤔]

I don't think the Senate has jurisdiction over regional elections.

[Alexander Hamilton]

I don't think the Senate has jurisdiction over regional elections.

Either way, this makes sure that fusion voting isn't illegal if a region wants to implement it.

[Lief 🗽]

How does a SoFA determine that a party has made an endorsement?

[Sam Spade]

I don't think the Senate has jurisdiction over regional elections.

Please give us some more cases so we can misinterpret the Constitution and fast!

[Hans-im-Glück]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't like it. Every voter must inform by himself about the endorsements of the parties. When he want to know it, the he can look into the convention thread.

[Alexander Hamilton]

How does a SoFA determine that a party has made an endorsement?

Notification of approval by the chairman of endorsing party.

[Alexander Hamilton]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't like it. Every voter must inform by himself about the endorsements of the parties. When he want to know it, the he can look into the convention thread.

Find one convention that hasn't fallen into petty arguments that cloud up multiple pages.

[cinyc]

I guess being from New York, I don't see this bill in the same way many others do.  Fusion voting, when utilized effectively, actually helps minor parties stay relevant.  Which candidate receives the Independence or Conservative Party line in New York matters in some races - and allows minor parties more influence in the system than they would in states without fusion voting. 

There's no need to limit fusion voting to non-STV elections.  Any party would be foolish to cross-endorse too many candidates in an STV Senate election - that would limit their influence. 

[Marokai Backbeat]

Friendly amendment offered:

1. Any declared candidate for the offices of President, Governor, Regional Senator and Lt. Governor in the Republic of Atlasia may opt to appear on the ballot for all major parties offering the candidate an official endorsement.
2. Official endorsements by parties must be certified by the chairman of the party giving the endorsement.
3. The SoFA must be notified of the endorsement at least 5 days in advance by the declared candidate receiving a cross-endorsement.
4. This legislation also applies to special elections for at-large Senators.

I will let this amendment go through unobjected to on my part and be accepted as friendly as it's the sponsor bringing the amendment forward.

However, I still see no point to this bill. There's absolutely no point to it and it will do nothing but muck and muddy things up. Why do we need multiple party tags to appear by people on the ballot, what is the point of this? Endorsements for uninteresting seats usually doesn't make a bit of difference, and who would endorse another member for president instead of running someone on their own?

I'm still entirely opposed to this legislation. A party's candidate is a party's candidate. If someone wants to use an endorsement they should do it in more meaningful ways than cluttering the ballot.

[Alexander Hamilton]

In many races, a party neglects to run a candidate. Marokai, you might remember quite well your special election race to replace DWTL. The DA did not run a [legitimate] candidate. In July, DWTL was essentially the RPP/DA candidate against Fritz (who ironically was a former DA member and much closer to their membership ideologically than DWTL, not that it matters). The same could be said for numerous regional races. Why shouldn't Mechaman be able to wear JCP under his name against Vepres if the JCP endorses him? That is the whole point of endorsements, otherwise it is simply a way for people to reveal how they will vote earlier than the election, which is pointless.

[Marokai Backbeat]

In many races, a party neglects to run a candidate. Marokai, you might remember quite well your special election race to replace DWTL. The DA did not run a [legitimate] candidate. In July, DWTL was essentially the RPP/DA candidate against Fritz (who ironically was a former DA member and much closer to their membership ideologically than DWTL). The same could be said for numerous regional races. Why shouldn't Mechaman be able to wear JCP under his name against Vepres if the JCP endorses him? That is the whole point of endorsements, otherwise it is simply a way for people to reveal how they will vote earlier than the election, which is pointless.

The Democratic Alliance didn't run a strong candidate in my special election race, but why on earth would the party endorse me over him anyway? Many parties give automatic preferences to their party's candidates, the only time this makes a difference is when a major party, for some strange reason, doesn't put up a candidate and endorses someone else.

But that does not happen very much at all in single-position races. Things like the Fritz-DWTL race only happen because they're special elections and not at all common.

Endorsements are, I'm sorry to break it to everyone, just a piece of feel good procedure we go through that doesn't matter at all. Besides, why do it for some races and not others? Picking and choosing races we apply these procedures to is silly, in my opinion, it's all or nothing in my mind.

This legislation, despite how this may sound, just strikes me as an effort to change the ballots around to confuse "zombies" into voting for different candidates. I don't believe this is a useful change nor do I believe that it's made genuinely.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Further, like I said before, parties in Atlasia make endorsements because everyone likes to think we need to endorse someone for every single office, so people make endorsements even if they don't like them. If the JCP endorsed Inks or something, that doesn't mean we actually like Inks' positions, it means we didn't have anyone else to endorse so we just endorsed him.

Endorsements in Atlasia are made out of obligation, not careful thinking. I don't want to throw in something like this that would be tacked onto every candidate that got a "what the hell" endorsement.

[Alexander Hamilton]

This bill attempts to rectify those problems, Marokai. Endorsements shouldn't be about just co-signing a campaign. It's about giving your party representation where you don't field a candidate. For all pragmatic purposes, Hashemite was the de facto JCP candidate in October's Senate race. Why not just have him on the ballot with both parties listed? Seriously, we have 5 major parties and not every race is a 5 candidate race, nor should it be. Fusion voting works in practice where it is allowed and it won't hurt to try it here. If it didn't work out, it would be easy to repeal. Why not give it a try? This isn't just a "change for change's sake."

[Alexander Hamilton]

Further, like I said before, this bill is not just meant to clutter up ballots. The language requires an official certification by chairman and an acknowledgement of acceptance by the candidate. This isn't some measure just to give everyone a bunch of parties listed after their name. This is meant to solve the problems, give parties more of a voice and hopefully make elections more competitive, by causing candidates to earn endorsements in some instances rather than just run unopposed.

[Marokai Backbeat]

You've made a good, and shockingly mature, case for it. I'll give it more thought, but I'm still hesitant.

[Alexander Hamilton]

You've made a good, and shockingly mature, case for it. I'll give it more thought, but I'm still hesitant.

I don't fool around when I'm serious.