Money: I'm not yet convinced that there isn't some clever way to address this problem. But you may be right that continuing to tighten the noose is that all we can realistically do...although I do feel that there were some pretty egregious abuses of the intent of the "527" law this election cycle, which at least suggests that we should revisit how that's all defined.
Top 6: maybe a "top 6 that each got >= 5%" clause, or something analogous for approval voting? I don't want to force the system to accept 6 candidates, two of which got only their own write-in on the ballot. Anyway, these are details.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: Destroy the parties, and remake america from their ashes.
Date: 5 November 2004 15:35 (UTC)Top 6: maybe a "top 6 that each got >= 5%" clause, or something analogous for approval voting? I don't want to force the system to accept 6 candidates, two of which got only their own write-in on the ballot. Anyway, these are details.