Why the Constitutional party needs range voting (Executive summary)

  1. Range voting appears to be supported by the Bible to a greater extent than any other voting system.
  2. The founding fathers who wrote the US Constitution were aware of other voting systems and also aware that deciding which was the best was difficult. They appear to have intentionally not specified in the constitution which system the US should use, precisely because they did not know at that time which was the best.
  3. Range Voting would have gotten Constitution 2004 Presidential candidate Michael Peroutka 50 times more votes than he got under plurality and 6 times as many as he would have gotten under Approval Voting.
  4. Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) would be a huge mistake for Constitutionalists since it just leads to 2-party domination just like the plurality system.
  5. Without a change in the voting system to get rid of Duverger's law of 2-party domination, Constitutionalists and all third-party candidates will forever have no chance. There is not a single third-party member of the House, Senate, or high Executive branch (zero out of about 600 people).
  6. The plurality voting system is in fact diabolical because it causes: (a) voters who want to vote Constitution actually make the US less Constitutional by doing so, or (b) if they vote major party, then that kills off the Constitution party.
  7. So it is a matter of survival: you must push range voting.

More details

Back to main page