A Systems Framework for Remedying Distortions in U.S. Democracy

Wang, Samuel; Cervas, Jonathan; Grofman, Bernard; Lipsitz, Keena

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3800433

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, as Wang et al (28) argue, a series of institutional and other factors are contributing to alter political representation: When the median voter is not the pivotal voter, within-party processes work to elect more extreme politicians. To remedy this distortion of US democracy, the authors argue for institutional fixes, such as rankedchoice voting and campaign finance and redistricting reforms.…”

Section: Baldassarri: the Perils Of Affective Polarization: When Partisan Identity Trumps Social Cleavagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The emergence and perils of polarization

Baldassarri

Page

2021

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We provide commentaries on the papers included in the Dynamics of Political Polarization Special Feature. Baldassarri reads the contribution of the papers in light of the theoretical distinction between ideological partisanship, which is generally rooted in sociodemographic and political cleavages, and affective partisanship, which is, instead, mostly fueled by emotional attachment and repulsion, rather than ideology and material interests. The latter, she argues, is likely to lead to a runaway process and threaten the pluralistic bases of contemporary democracy. Page sees the contribution of the many distinct models in the ensemble as potentially contributing more than the parts. Individual papers identify distinct causes of polarization as well as potential solutions. Viewed collectively, the papers suggest that the multiple causes of polarization may self-reinforce, which suggests that successful interventions would require a variety of efforts. Understanding how to construct such interventions may require larger models with greater realism.

show abstract

Section: Baldassarri: the Perils Of Affective Polarization: When Partisan Identity Trumps Social Cleavagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The emergence and perils of polarization

Baldassarri

Page

2021

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…eforms to address perceived deficiencies in American elections have included changes to primary rules (Grose 2020;McGhee et al 2014), redistricting reform (Grofman and Cervas 2018;Nagle 2019;Saxon 2020), and revisions to election registration and balloting rules (Burden et al 2014), among others (Wang et al 2021). One particular voting reform that has generated significant recent interest is the instant runoff election, commonly referred to as ranked-choice voting (RCV).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Donald Trump Should Be a Fervent Advocate of Using Ranked-Choice Voting in 2024

Cervas

Grofman

2021

APSC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article builds on work by Devine and Kopko (2021) and Lacy and Burden (1999) who estimated a probit model of candidate choice from nationally representative survey data to determine the second choice of third-party voters. Using this model on 2020 election data, we show that the Libertarian candidate Jo Jorgenson probably cost Donald Trump victory in at least two states: Arizona and Georgia. Additionally, the popular-vote margin enjoyed by Joe Biden could have been between 260,000 and 525,000 fewer votes, using conservative estimates. The motivation for this article is to provide contrary evidence for two main misconceptions. First, that third-party candidates are “spoiling” elections for the Democrats. Our evidence clearly shows that third parties have the potential to hurt either of the two main parties; however, in 2020, it was Donald Trump who was hurt the most, although not consequentially. Second, some reformers believe that ranked-choice voting benefits the Democrats; again, we show that—all else being equal—in the 2020 presidential election, it was the Republicans who would have benefited by the change in rules because the majority of third-party votes went to the Libertarian candidate, whose voters prefer Republicans over Democrats 60% to 32%.

show abstract