Do you support the "Electoral Reform Amendment"?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

No.  Why not abolish regional seats and replace them with districts instead?

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

No.  I am opposed to Labor's newest attempt to stamp out minor parties and dominate the game.  At least minor parties have a chance at winning At Large seats. They won't after the amendment, as Labor and perhaps TPP conspire to gerrymander seats to keep and sustain their majority.

an independent just won the south's regional senate seat…

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

I support the amendment.

In our at-large elections, the last two seats are usually settled by arcane preference math, and that lends an advantage to the largest parties who are better positioned to coordinate strategic preference among their preferred candidates. The result is elections that are dull, difficult to follow, and unfair.

If you look at the Senate's history, there's no clear pattern where independent or minor parties are more likely to win at-large seats.

Over the past year-and-a-half, only four parties have won at-large seats (Labor, Federalists, TPP, and Democratic Republicans), and the only elected independent won the regional seat in the IDS. You have to go back to the first couple of elections after dissolution - an unusual moment in the game's history - to find independent or minor party candidates winning at-large Senate seats. (The only real exception that I'm aware of since then is Xahar.)

this is a good point. i will vote yes.