HB 19-44: Make Peebs Happy Again Act (Voting)

[Poirot]

I post one of my intervention in the Senate thread bill. If the problem is presentation of the census I suggest of finding other ways to present census, maybe put the bigger parties in a table and the others separately. I'm Chair of a small party and this bill will make it harder to be visible and survive.

I am strongly opposed to increasing the number of members required for an organized party. You should not make it harder for small parties to be visible to give them a chance to grow. Or only because a few people should have a party they believe in, and respecting political divversity.

Not sure if it's the formating in the census that is causing problems (too many columns). If it's that maybe it would be acceptable to list the smallest parties below the table, just one line by party. Like
SOS party 2-0-1
XYZ party 0-0-3 (numbers are members for the three regions).

Or even if it respects the requirements, just for the smallest parties list only the number of members below the table so the public knows they exist.

SOS party 3
XYZ party 3 

The problem we have is mammoth parties, it's not the tiny parties so maybe try to find ways to accomodate the RG without changing a longstanding rule of our democracy.

[Poirot]

Is it fair the more zombies are recruited, the harder it becomes for small parties to blossom. I ask to review the method of census presentation if it causes a problem but not change the political party requirement.

[Poirot]

I've already visited Congress a few times about this but here I am to beg you again to not proceed with raising the requirement to be an official party.

You don't have to hamper political diversity to change the census presentation. I have suggested other ways to present the census if it is a problem while not changing the status of political parties. Congress didn't even discuss alternative census presentations.

Congress looks determined to erase some parties to have a more compact census. It doesn't seem to care it will remove the fun for some people. A party of three might not be seeking to become a dominant party and is happy being small. They could have their fun, they are visible because they are official. A new party could have more trouble taking off because it will take more time to become official and visible in the census presentation.

Keeping it easier to reach official party status can make the political environment more dynamic. You are not taking away the fun for some. I don't think you should try to lower the number of parties like you are doing.   

[Poirot]

Disappointing that Congress rejected this, 5 people is very easy to get, it's not some insurmountable burden. The parties under 5 members aren't even active parties anymore and realistically shouldn't linger on, but based on what Congress decided these zombie parties will linger on.

Easy to get depends on the persons involved. What I find disappointing is the will to change a long  standing basic rule and make it harder for a niche party, a new party or just small party to be official and visible and let those who are not in a mammoth size party have some fun and offer political diversity. If the problem is formatting the census then look inro that.