'Choice ranking' is worth a try
Representatives who follow the dictates of their party's leadership don't truly serve districts, state, or the nation. They reduce respect for government. Yet, we don't know if it is candidates, voters, or unknown factors that have produced current dissatisfaction.
Ideally, elections are meant to reflect public preference for public office. But, when four or more contenders thin out tallies, a "win" by 30 percent carries a 70 percent rejection. This long-ignored predicament masks the public will.
A new way of voting is being suggested: "1-2-3" or "choice ranking," whereby voters choose their first, second and third choices for each office. It is being recommended to prevent expensive runoff elections following a tie, but its better use is to clarify public preference. If third-choice tallies indicate strong rejection of a questionable first-choice winner, another first - or stronger second-choice - wins.
Trial runs of 1-2-3 for campus elections at universities are feasible. Computer programming majors could devise mathematical formulae to interpret ranked-choice percentages and determine winners. If successful, it's worth a try in public elections. It also could end distortion of primary results by cross-party voting for weak opposition candidates.
RACHEL WHEELER
Take a look at political fiction
The following are fiction and fantasy:
The CEOs of the majority of U.S. corporations have just issued a joint statement expressing regret at their companies' histories of profiteering while being unconcerned regarding any degree of damage done by their decisions and actions to the health and well-being of others.
They also apologize for their companies' having paid little and, in some cases, no taxes through the years.
Yesterday, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney issued statements admitting they lied about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction and its being involved in 9/11. They further expressed remorse at the resultant slaughter of many thousands of Iraqis, including women and children and the thousands of American casualties.
The Republican National Committee has just announced support for government-run universal health care. It has lately expressed dismay that millions of American children are without health care coverage. "Where is this country's compassion and humanity?" All citizens regardless of economic and/or social status deserve full medical coverage is the current Republican philosophy.
Barack Obama has begun to show courage, trustworthiness and a commitment to fulfilling his campaign pledges.
A. SHELDON GELBURD