Pennsylvania Voters Short-Changed By County Commissioner Voting System

image
Created: 29 Aug, 2013
Updated: 14 Oct, 2022
2 min read

The rallying cry in the 1770’s was “Taxation Without Representation”.  They fought a war over it and THEY won.  But we are still losing.

In Pennsylvania, many counties have a bizarre system to guarantee representation of a minority party.  The counties have 3 commissioners and have written the laws to stipulate all 3 cannot be from the same political party.  On the face of it that is fine and good.

However, in practice, this needs some tuning.  The reality is voters can only vote for 2 commissioners.

Even though there are 3 slots open, you can only vote for 2 people!

Since a party can only capture 2 of the 3 slots, the major parties only put up 2 candidates for the 3 slots.  The campaign becomes - ‘Vote for our team of two people to become the majority’.  If a major party put up 3 candidates you would have one of the candidates as an odd person out, siphoning votes from the other 2 major party candidates on the ticket.  Or worse, a team of 2 insiders would be working against their teammate even before facing the other party’s team.  As a party, it is just smarter to put 2 people up and not have a fight you do not need.

What appears to be a good thing might not...
What appears to be a good thing might not...

The issue is - somewhere along the way the general public lost the ability to vote for all 3 slots.  Maybe hyper-partisanship took over to say:

If we can’t run three people, why would we allow the public to vote for three people?  If the public were to use that other vote they would start to look at the other party as a viable place to send that vote.  We would be allowing the other party into the system.

The general election becomes a game of musical chairs where 4 candidates vie for 3 slots.  This is where one of the parties perceives that they are in a weaker position and one of the candidates from the ‘weaker’ party begins to ‘cut’ their running mate by making a deal with the ‘stronger’ party.

It becomes a mess.

A solution to hyper-partisanship in this case may be to allow voters to cast a ballot for each open seat.

More Choice for San Diego

Keep the parties sending up two people for their tickets, but allow voters to make a selection for EACH seat open.  That third vote floating out there could go to the other major party candidate or to an alternate party candidate.  Alternatively, the voter could bullet vote their party’s slate (only cast 2 of their three ballots).

The choice of the voter would be made by the person casting it – and not restricted by a warping of party politics.

Latest articles

Idaho Capitol Building
Idaho Lawmakers Are Going After the Ballot Initiative Process
Idaho lawmakers are still fuming that citizen-led groups dared try to change the way the state elects its lawmakers. The 2024 initiative failed, but now a bill in the legislature would make it harder for any ballot proposition to pass....
09 Jan, 2025
-
2 min read
Andrew Yang
Andrew Yang Makes a Bold Prediction about The Next Presidential Race
Former presidential candidate and Forward Party Founder Andrew Yang kicked off 2025 with some predictions about what will happen this year in the US political landscape on his podcast, Forward. ...
09 Jan, 2025
-
2 min read
Image of voters at a polling location.
Bill Filed to Close Indiana's Critical Primary Elections
Indiana lawmakers will consider a bill filed in the state's House of Representatives that seeks to the close the state's primary elections and condition full voting rights on joining one of two major political parties. ...
07 Jan, 2025
-
2 min read