Contemporary Political Reforms in a Multi Party Democracy

 I know that it might be news to you, but the US just had one of its most controversial elections so far.  When nobody trusts any side but their own, they excuse themselves and blame everyone else for their failures and any action against them becomes a grand conspiracy theory to discredit them for personal profit or power (or both, as is usually the case).  There are certainly times in history when we know that fraud has happened, violence happens during elections (Tiberius Gracchus was murdered by the Senatorial class as he was running for a second term as Tribune, doing so was a literally a sacrilege). But this is not inevitable, and a multi party system has many benefits that can help to limit this. Some institutional problems, those established by ordinary laws and sometimes constitutional (mostly state constitutions but not necessarily only state constitutions), amplify this very much so, others depend on executive action (or inaction), the conduct of voters themselves and those

 In a multi party republic, where all public positions are elected through the full use of ranked choice voting with secret ballots, using the form of proportional representation by single transferable vote for multi member position as in a Congress, instant runoff voting for governors among others, legislation is still passed by the same institutions, through majority votes in the Congress in each House, and with the signature of the President or their veto, and the possible override by a 2/3 supermajority in each House, and states have their own version (a few states have weak vetoes though, but may be supplemented through line item vetoes). But the increase in the factions and the decentralization of authority in the congress and the probability of a single party being unable to acquire enough votes to block a veto override has major implications for the process of legislation. So, what important things change? A major thing to add is that parties become split in an important manner

 For no particular reason, for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Ruth Bader Ginsberg died on September 18th, 2020 for reasons that actually have nothing to do with COVID-19, I want to talk about judges in America and the judiciary more generally. So, to recap some things. The legislatures and multi member bodies with each member having equal power and their members only having power collectively in America are elected in this model by single transferable vote, primaries nominate their candidates for multi member bodies like legislatures and special district boards (like school boards) by single transferable vote, other positions are elected by ranked ballots with their respective primaries using ranked ballots as well, with majority votes necessary to win.  To start, let's see how courts are constitutionally regulated. The federal courts are mostly pretty similar in their appointment. The president nominates someone, and the senate confirms them, serving

 In the rules I established earlier, elections across America have single transferable vote for each election and the primaries.  This creates many interesting consequences for foreign policy. The president as you'll remember will have had to do a lot more negotiation when coming up with their cabinet and appointments, including 188 ambassadors, by my count, 166 other positions confirmed tied to foreign affairs, and that's not even including the military positions which will be vital for America's military ties to it's allies and the way other countries view the American army, as an occupation force or a liberating army, whichever way the US treats their country. Political balance required by law on several important multi member boards like the Peace Corps also means more parties than just Democrats and Republicans on them of course, if now you need to not split it down half between two, now you might need to give a fifth to five parties.  Some of the positions will li

 Almost all Americans who are aware at all about politics have some kind of opinion about the issues of lobbying, interest groups, and campaign financing. As usual, it gets complicated, but there are some things to remember when thinking about how it might work in a multi party presidential republic. First, let's try defining some terms.  A lobbyist is a kind of person whose profession it is is to convince other people to support other things using the latter's power and authority. They usually for it for pay although sometimes do it pro bono, IE for free for some varying reason like personally being really interested in the subject, being able to put it on their resume in the future, or otherwise, although normally they would be paid if someone already had a good resume and didn't have a personal fascination or care for the topic. Lobbying is just the verb form of their profession, which some people might associate with the oldest profession.  An interest group is any grou

 Americans often have pride in the idea of America being a federal state, one where sovereignty is directly vested from the people in both the federal and state governments and prize decentralization.  Given the true vastness of America, 330 million people, the fourth largest country in the world with 9.8 million square kilometres or 3.8 million square miles, fifty states, ranging from the population of Wyoming, to the median of about 4,558,234 people, and a median area of 151,953 sq km or 57,093 sq miles, each with so many different cultures, many with strong minority languages besides English, and their respective histories, this is likely for the best.  Good reforms have come at the state level, but often, people see their states anymore as politically competitive and have less trust that they will follow the will of their people. Ballotpedia has a map of trifectas, where the same party controls both houses of the state legislature (or the state senate in the case of Nebraska, alway