The question goes back to the Election of State Senator Scott Brown to replace the TSW down in DC.
There was some whining in The Boston Globe about people "not feeling represented" any more, what with a Republican having been elected. For example, we have the letter last Friday from Mr Mark Bridger, of Newton. He says: "Although Scott Brown won the election, there is a large chunk of Bay Staters he doesn't seem to represent."
Now there is a new problem—a large chunk of Bay Staters feeling they are not represented down in DC. Mr Bridger; try being a Republican with all twelve members of the delegation being registered Democrats.
The question is, should we fix Mr Bridger's problem, by bringing proportional representation to our delegation in the US House of Representatives?
The way it would work is that we would run the race state wide. Each party would put forward a slate of up to ten candidates. Then, we, the People, would vote for slate. The votes would then be counted by party. If the Democrats won 60% of the votes, they would get six seats and the top six people on their slate would be sent to Washington. If the Republicans won 30% of the vote, the top three people on their slate would head down to DC. The Libertarians (or Greens, or Peace and Freedom Party, or whoever wins at least 5% plus 1 vote would get to send their top person to DC.
How would we decide the ranking in the slates? We could do it by party convention or we could ask the voters to rack and stack them during the election itself.
Regarding the US Senate, frankly I don't see this scheme working.
But, back to Mr Bridger, do we meet the complaint or do we tell him to just go away?
Regards — Cliff