AH Challenge: U.S. Proportional Representation.

What would it take for Proportional Representation to become the predominant method of selecting legislative seats in the United States? I'm throwing it out there because while it's interesting to theorize a PR-style government in the U.S., given how unlikely it seems either major party would sign its own death warrant, I'm not sure anyone has come up with a plausible means of electoral reform.

As a general primer, in the U.S. without substantial changes to the constitution, it would be impossible to alter how the President or the Senate was elected. The House can constitutionally be elected by PR, although statute currently prohibits it (since the 1950s, IIRC). If there was no limiting statute, each state could independently set up a proportional representation electoral system for selecting its own representatives, although this would be useless for states with only 1 representative, and presumably most states with two or even three reps would still elect almost entirely Republicans and Democrats.
 

Thande

Donor
Not actually that hard if you go back to the beginning. Jefferson and Hamilton invented several of the systems of PR used today, although they never caught on at the time and were independently re-invented later on.

EDIT: And now I notice this is in post-1900 and I look like a tit. Still, it helps any American reformist that PR systems were invented by Real Red Blooded Heroic American Founding Fatherses.
 

mowque

Banned
Not actually that hard if you go back to the beginning. Jefferson and Hamilton invented several of the systems of PR used today, although they never caught on at the time and were independently re-invented later on.

EDIT: And now I notice this is in post-1900 and I look like a tit. Still, it helps any American reformist that PR systems were invented by Real Red Blooded Heroic American Founding Fatherses.

A few states used it post-1900 actually. Mostly for local races and such. Still, something to build on.
 
Not actually that hard if you go back to the beginning. Jefferson and Hamilton invented several of the systems of PR used today, although they never caught on at the time and were independently re-invented later on.

EDIT: And now I notice this is in post-1900 and I look like a tit. Still, it helps any American reformist that PR systems were invented by Real Red Blooded Heroic American Founding Fathers.

Yeah, I thought about putting it in Pre 1900, but in some ways an earlier POD is less interesting, as nothing resembling the OTL party system would ever arise in that case. Plus, as you said, it's quite easy to accomplish at that point. The major issue with PR being developed so early is formalized party structures were just in their infancy. Indeed, some naive founding fathers thought we could have avoided them entirely, and PR really does require political parties.
 
What would it take for Proportional Representation to become the predominant method of selecting legislative seats in the United States? I'm throwing it out there because while it's interesting to theorize a PR-style government in the U.S., given how unlikely it seems either major party would sign its own death warrant, I'm not sure anyone has come up with a plausible means of electoral reform.

As a general primer, in the U.S. without substantial changes to the constitution, it would be impossible to alter how the President or the Senate was elected. The House can constitutionally be elected by PR, although statute currently prohibits it (since the 1950s, IIRC). If there was no limiting statute, each state could independently set up a proportional representation electoral system for selecting its own representatives, although this would be useless for states with only 1 representative, and presumably most states with two or even three reps would still elect almost entirely Republicans and Democrats.

Actually, the most plausible scenario would be having PR imposed by the Supreme Court. It's not as far-fetched as you might think. Remember that the Supreme Court in the '60s took a pretty radical view of voting rights. "One man one vote" was a pretty radical ruling that completely reshaped most state legislatures.

And although I can't find the source anymore, I remember reading an article that said the Court in the '60s seemed to be heading towards declaring a constitutional right to proportional representation, which would have made sense alongside their civil rights rulings and various voting rights rulings.

So maybe a plausible POD would be a more liberal court that extends the Warren Court rulings and ultimately rules for proportional representation. Maybe Humphrey wins in '68 and appoints more liberal jurists?

Of course, a PR ruling would almost certainly have spawned a big backlash, and a constitutional amendment may have stood a good chance of overturning such a ruling. As it was, there were serious attempts to amend the constitution to do away with "one man one vote," and with nearly all elected pols opposing PR, it'd be a lot easier to undo.
 
Top