Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Hawaii special election reveals absurdity of single member House districts

Ed Case (D), Colleen Hanabusa (D), and Charles Djou (R) are currently competing for the vacant seat of Neil Abercrombie (D-HI). What is unusual about this is the presence of two Democrats competing in a heavily Democratic state. Ed Case is a former Representative who caucused with the conservative Blue Dog Caucus. Colleen Hanabusa is the state senate president and known to be the most progressive candidate in the race. Since Hawaii has a plurality election system, meaning the candidate with the most votes automatically wins, the Democrats could win a combined 51% of the vote and still lose to the Republican candidate. Lets look where it stands.
Charles Djou (R) 36%
Ed Case (D) 34%
Colleen Hanabusa (D) 20%
Undecided 13%

The polls show Charles Djou leading the election with Ed Case a close second. Colleen Hanabusa falls behind, only receiving 20% of the vote. Ed Case and the DCCC are arguing that he is the stronger candidate to face the Republican candidate. Obama has stopped short of endorsing Case by releasing a poll showing him as the stronger candidate. In this poll, the two Democrats receive at least 56% of the vote, even without undecideds. Does this make sense to hand a Republican victory to the Republican ticket even when they received around 1/3 of the popular vote? This has happened in Vermont when the Democratic and Progressive tickets split the liberal vote to reelect Republican Governor Jim Douglas and more recently in New York with the election to replace John McHugh. Runoff elections are the easiest way to solve a problem like this, but proportional representation based on partisan vote share is the most fair way to remedy vote splitting.
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

1 comment:

  1. AnonymousMay 4, 2010 at 3:39 PM

    Abercrombie is about as progressive as they come in the Democratic Party. He's held that seat for 20 years, and being a progressive never stood in his way. Why Obama would want to replace him with a Blue Dog is something that passes human understanding. But then, Obama's announcement one month ago that he would allow oil drilling off the continental shelf also defies rational explanation--unless he's simply sold out to Big Oil. This mess in the Gulf should make him rethink that decision, but I'm becoming "progressively" less optimistic he will see the light.
    Back on topic: Runoff elections are a good idea, but proportional representation won't work so long as we have single-member districts--as mandated by the Constitution.
    IRV (Instant Runoff Voting) might help more: Each voter expresses a first and second preference. (In my case probably Green, then Democratic.) If no candidate gets a majority of "first votes," then the two top candidates are awarded the "second votes" cast by those who supported candidates placing third and lower. Potentially, this could lead to some Greens in Congress and perhaps some Libertarians as well. Might help keep the major parties honest, or even lead to one or both of them being supplanted.
    This idea may be getting some traction. (See Apr. 19 issue of The Nation, p. 5, lauding a pro-IRV column by Thomas Friedman in 3/24 NYT.)

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)