Q:  Is this practiced anywhere?

A:  For the selection of U.N. Secretary General, the option to disapprove is already available.  Why should we ordinary citizens not have this choice when we select our leaders? In Switzerland and Latvia, parliamentary seats are allocated based on proportional votes for the political parties.  On the party-ballot are listed all the party nominees so a voter can vote for a party and express disapproval or approval of each nominee.  California’s judicial retention ballot already has the option to vote NO. 

​

​

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Q: Where is the proof that this will increase participation?

A: A Rand Corp. survey of 2016 Presidential election showed had the option to vote NO being available, voter participation rate would have been 7.4% higher.  Similar RAND survey in 2020 showed that in the 12 swing states, voter participation rate would have been 3.4% higher.  Both also showed Trump would have received net negative votes: -3.9% and -2.0%. 

 

Q: How will this reduce negative campaign?

A: Under the current system, candidates often appeal to the more extreme elements of the major parties to win the nomination, and election campaigns are dominated by opponents throwing dirt on the opposition. Independent voters often feel frustrated but could do nothing.  With this choice, all future candidates must worry: will the independent voters vote For or Against me?  To win the hearts and minds of the independent voters, one must bring beef to the table instead of just throwing mud on the opposition.  All parties must also nominate better candidates. 

 

Q: Why does El Cerrito need it?

A : Look at it as an insurance policy or a vaccine against extremism.  Having this choice doesn’t hurt any voter, it strengthens every voter. It is possible that El Cerrito never gets an extremist candidate who might receive negative votes, but if it happens, this option will prevent such person from taking office. 

More voter participation is more democratic.  A 2019 Boston city council race was decided by just one vote difference.  It could be argued that if the choice of voting NO were available, it might have brought out two negative votes against the leader and altered the outcome, and that would have been a more democratic outcome.  More people voting voluntarily is good for democracy.

 

Q: Who support this reform?

A:  Among others, Professors Jess Brewer, George Leef, Lawrence Lessig and mathematician Paul Cohen.  Andrew Yang also said : “it’s more direct and powerful” [than ranked choice voting].   Aspen Institute selected this as 1 of 5 best ideas on 1/25/2019.

 

Please join our FB group.  We welcome critique and questions.  Feel free to raise them in the FB group for discussion.