Revisions of the System

There must, of course, be practical means of revising whatever election system is implemented. This issue has not been present with plurality elections since the basic paradigm has gone unchanged for so long, but since CondorcetThe general term for any election method that uses ranked ballots and has, as it's first princple, the Condorcet Criterion: any candidate which beats every other candidate individually must win the election. Any Condorcet method must come along with an ambiguity resolution procedure for cases in which there is no winner by this first criterion. and all its resolution procedures are somewhat novel, there must exist means of revision.

Condorcet Serves Itself Well

The most important decision in Condorcet is, of course, which ambiguity resolution scheme should be used, and it is must be necessary to change the method used as the electorate demands. Luckily, the multi-candidate nature of selecting a resolution scheme is perfectly suited to Condorcet itself. A referendum could simply be held from time to time to decide on an ambiguity resolution procedure. Of course, the first ambiguity resolution procedure would have to be either appointed by the legislature or chosen by PluralityThis is the voting system currently used for most American elections. Each voter chooses only one candidate, and the winner is the candidate with the most votes., but this is not significant, since, as discussed, as long as the Condorcet CriterionAny candidate that would defeat every other candidate in a one-on-one runoff must win the election. This is simply a restatement of majority rule. is in effect, the ambiguity resolution procedure is of secondary importance.

No Need for Initial National Consensus

In the beginning, election reform along the lines of Condorcet can be done at the district and state level, and the methods can vary across the nation. The states have always been considered “laboratories of Democracy,” and implementations of Condorcet will simply be another experiment, out of which one method will likely rise to the top.

How Much Fluidity is Necessary and Sufficient?

Obviously, the system cannot be too fluid or there will be chaos, but not to strict to allow growth and development. This is a value judgment that can take place in the legislature, but as a rule of thumb, each election policy should probably be held static for at least four years at a time, to allow most major seats to be contested and many examples to come forward for examination.

Of course, there must be some back-up plan if the citizens simply don’t take well to such an upheaval of the fundamental American system. At each level where reform is implemented, there must be some referendum several years later to abandon ship and return to the old ways if necessary. We greatly hope this would never occur, but without this provision for security, it is unlikely that many will board the ship in the first place.