Cautionary Notes
Files
Description
Richie and Hill argue that democratic justice requires proportional representation. Single-member district systems of election are, in their view, fundamentally defective; they are insufficiently representative, and they artificially reduce the options for voter choice, thus limiting the range of viewpoints present in the legislature and emasculating political debate and discussion. This reduction in the range of viable candidates diminishes the representation of minorities and historically under-represented groups (such as women) and tends to reduce voter turnout as well. In addition, single-member district (SMD) systems permit and encourage officials to gerrymander electoral districts in order to increase their own job security at the expense of making most legislative contests uncompetitive. Richie and Hill argue, moreover, that such systems cannot be reformed by regulating campaign finance, limiting incumbent control over redistricting, or redrawing districts with a view to fixing problems of "misrepresentation," both because such reforms are politically unfeasible and because they do not touch the root defects of SMD systems. The authors argue that there are proportional representation systems that would cure these defects, and that there is a politically practical path that can bring about a transition to such a system. Richie and Hill thus presents three arguments: the SMD systems are incurably defective, that there are superior PR systems, and that the adoption of PR is politically practical.
Source Publication
Reflecting All of Us: The Case for Proportional Representation, Robert Richie and Steven Hill
Source Editors/Authors
Joshua Cohen, Joel Rogers
Publication Date
1999
Recommended Citation
Ferejohn, John A., "Cautionary Notes" (1999). Faculty Chapters. 533.
https://gretchen.law.nyu.edu/fac-chapt/533
