KenzieD7876
03.11.2020 •
History
Na co povišil karel IV biskupství
Solved
Show answers
More tips
- C Computers and Internet How to Set Up Internet on iPhone? Detailed Guide with Step-by-Step Instructions...
- P Philosophy 8 привычек, чтобы достичь счастливой жизни...
- F Food and Cooking How Many Grams Are In a Tablespoon?...
- G Goods and services How to Choose the Right Iron: Purchase Tips...
- S Style and Beauty How to Choose the Perfect Hair Straightener?...
- H Health and Medicine How to Choose the Right Glasses?...
- H Health and Medicine What vaccines do children need?...
- H Health and Medicine AKDS Vaccination: Ensure Your Child s Safety...
- H Health and Medicine Flu: How to Recognize It by the First Symptoms?...
- H Health and Medicine What to Do If You Are Bitten by a Dog?...
Answers on questions: History
- H History Which two assumptions best fill in the blanks in the following sentence: might work as an economic incentive if individuals behave according to the assumption of New Soviet...
- H History How best can Indians preserve their autonomy and way of life as European settler populations grow?...
- H History An automotive service center would like feedback on its customer service. Each customer receives a printed card after they pay for services with a short survey on which...
- H History What would be the purpose to add lower courts if the constitution creates supreme court?...
- H History Does Hamilton get his Financial Plan passed by Congress?...
- H History que dos grupos sociales se conformaron en el sistema económico capitalista y porque aparecio un nuevo tipo de conflicto social...
- H History For what reason did General Cos announce that he was going to take a large force to Texas? Select one: To collect import duties To arrest those disloyal to mexico To capture...
- H History What was a belief of the federalist party...
- C Chemistry Can someone please help me with this? This is due today, please please help me!...
- S Spanish Please help me I’m so stressed out and just wanna go to sleep...
Ответ:
you want the translation?
Explanation:
Ответ:
New political players and movements like the Tea Party, Occupy, Move-On, and the Club for Growth, seem to highlight our increasing inability to compromise or find common ground.
There are no doubt many explanations for why gridlock seems to be getting worse. Here’s mine:
After every national census, which occurs every 10 years, it’s necessary to re-apportion congressional districts and state legislative districts to account for changes in population. In most states that process is highly political, the majority party trying to draw the lines so that it can win the maximum number of districts.
Thanks to computers, this is now a very scientific and accurate process of assuring that the maximum number of districts have at least 60% likely voters for the majority party, and no more than 40% likely voters for the minority party. Many of the minority party’s voters are deliberately concentrated together in districts where its percentage of likely voters approaches 100%.
This process has an old name, “gerrymandering”, and has been going on for a long time, though without the current precision in desired results.
The result of this process is that most congressional and legislative districts are effectively non-competitive between the two political parties. In those districts the election that really counts is the primary election to determine the candidate of whichever party controls that district.
Primary elections have lower voter turnout than general elections. So the most extreme and passionate elements of each party have a disproportionate impact on primary elections, which obliges elected officials to pander to them or risk being challenged in the next primary.
That’s why both political parties are dominated by the most extreme and uncompromising members. If you think that’s a problem, here’s what can be done about it:
First, states can replace partisan primary elections with non-partisan “Top Two” or “blanket primaries” in which any candidate can run regardless of party, with only the top two vote-getters proceeding to a second-round run-off primary if no one gets a majority, even if the top two are from the same party. This system has been adopted in Louisiana, Washington, and California.
This kind of primary requires all candidates to appeal to all voters, not just the majority in one political party. Candidates will have to appeal to centrists who prefer practical non-ideological solutions. Why should states pay for restricted primary elections for political parties anyway?
Second, we should make voting mandatory for citizens, with a small fine for failure to vote without a good excuse, as in Australia and some other foreign countries. This would increase voter turn-out and pressure candidates to tailor their message to less passionate and more practical and independent voters in a larger electorate.
Finally, we should try to take re-apportionment out of the hands of self-serving elected officials, and assign the task to a non-partisan commission with clear and transparent guidelines as is done in Australia, Canada, and many European democracies. In the U.S., Iowa and California have taken this obvious step towards good government