The 2-party system that we have is a result of
single-representative election districts, which makes it
pretty much impossible for a third party to get any
representatives elected.
This fact is known as Duverger’s law in Political Science.
There are some interesting articles on this topic in
Wikipedia. The technical name they use is “single-member
district plurality system (SMDP)”.
What would it take to change election laws so that there is
at least 20 representatives per district? Nothing short of a
minor revolution, I think.
But if successful, parties down to 5% would then have a
chance to get represented, and we could have some real
democracy around here.
Add on a parliamentary system, and we would depose (!) the
president when necessary. The advantage of the parliamentary
system is that one can get rid of all the current members of
the executive branch by a simple vote of no-confidence,
unlike the need for impeachment trials, which are also
impeded by the implicit 2-party system.
Having at least a few (4-5) major parties ensures that each
party must actually stand for something to be
successful. Party list elections ensures that the system
cannot be corrupted one representative at a time, which is
what happens in the US. If a representative of some party
behaves corruptly or criminally, the party will lose votes,
and/or the representative will not be nominated on the next
party election list. Since there are >2 parties, there will
be competition for being the less corrupt party, unlike now
where both parties are corrupt and can get away with it.
I’m dreaming of something better than what we have — many
countries in Europe and other parts of the world are
successfully and peacefully governed within a system that
supports multiple parties and truly proportional
representation, down to a small level of granularity (5% in
Germany, for example).
