Does Top Two voting make elections more democratic, or is it in fact anti-democratic? Top Two, just so we're clear on the issue, is defined in this manner: "In a Top Two election system all candidates for an office run against each other in the first round of voting. The two candidates with the most votes in the first round are nominated to move on to the final election. In the final election between two candidates, the candidate with the most votes wins."
While a variety of organizations are working for electoral reform that will give more sway to independent voters and voters in the political middle, there are sharp disagreements about Top Two in particular.
We have asked proponents on both sides of this argument to state their cases. On the pro side is Nancy Hanks, who runs The Hankster blog and is affiliated with the Committee for a Unified Independent Party. Speaking for the con side is Solomon Kleinsmith, who operates the Rise of the Center blog.
With today's opening pieces, we begin a series that will follow with two rounds of rebuttal and one wrap-up where the two will discuss their areas of common ground. The debate starts with Nancy . . .
Feb 10, 2011
At The Examiner, Ken Bingenheimer is hosting a debate on the merits of the top two primary system. Both sides, pro and con, are represented by contributors to TPID, Nancy Hanks and Solomon Kleinsmith. From The Examiner: