Expand Messages
• The below can be used with computerized voting pending some more advanced education about Head to Head (Condorcet) math. 1. Each Elector (voter) may vote YES
Message 1 of 11 , Apr 12, 2003
• 0 Attachment
The below can be used with computerized voting pending some more advanced

1. Each Elector (voter) may vote YES for 1 or more candidates (YES votes).

2. Each Elector (voter) may rank 1 or more candidates (using 1, 2, 3, etc.)
(Number Votes in first, second, third, etc. place).

Legislative body elections-

Step 1. If the number of candidates (or remaining candidates) is more than
the number to be elected, then the candidate with the lowest number of YES

Step 2. The Number Votes for each candidate lower than a loser on each ballot
shall move up and step 1 shall be repeated, if necessary.

Step. 3. Each final winner shall have a voting power in the legislative body
equal to the final first place votes that he/she gets. [that is -- proxy
proportional representation]

Executive/Judicial officer elections (electing N officers) -

Step 1. If the number of candidates (or remaining candidates) is more than N
(or the number of unfilled remaining positions), then the candidates getting
the highest first place (or first plus second place) (or first plus second
plus third place) (and so forth) YES majorities shall be elected.

Step 2. If there are less than N YES majorities after all YES place votes are
combined, then the highest YES candidate(s) shall be elected for the unfilled
remaining position(s).

----

YES votes are used since there is obviously a YES/NO aspect to voting
regarding candidates as well as regarding ballot issues.

A matrix would be formed ---

PV A B C D E etc.

1 A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 etc.
2 A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 etc.
3 A3 B3 C3 D3 E3 etc.
4 A4 B4 C4 D4 E4 etc.
5 A5 B5 C5 D5 E5 etc.
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Some or all of the place votes on each level are also YES votes.

Legislative body elections-

Lower candidates move up on each ballot until N remain (who are elected). If
a candidate gets first place votes equal to the Droop Quota, then he/she will
be elected. Droop Quota = (Total votes / (N +1)) + 1

Of course, there may/will be divided majorities and/or divided minorities.

The voters in favor of each party will likely only vote YES for such party's
candidates (and other allied parties if the party is very small - i.e.
unlikely to get a Droop Quota).

That is - larger and smaller parties may each elect 1 or more candidates.

Example - Elect 5 to a legislative body. 10 candidates in 5 parties. 100
voters.

Final results-

First place votes (which may be a combination of YES and/or NO votes)

25 B (party A)
22 D (party A)
26 X (party B)
15 Z (party B)
12 M (party C)
100 Total

Executive/Judicial Elections --

Zero, 1 or more candidates may get a YES majority at each accumulated YES
place votes level. Each voter has N *effective* votes at each YES place

Example - 3 judges to be elected. 7 candidates.

1 candidate gets a first place YES majority
1 candidate gets a first plus second place YES majority
1 candidate gets the highest first plus second plus third place YES majority
• OK, this probably isn t the time for this, but it just happened to come to mind now b/c i had a message from this list in my inbox.... When I joined this list
Message 2 of 11 , Apr 13, 2003
• 0 Attachment
OK, this probably isn't the time for this, but it just
happened to come to mind now b/c i had a message from
this list in my inbox....

When I joined this list way back when, i had hoped it
would be for the discussion of tangible ways that we
could work toward endorsement of electoral reform
strategies by the LP.* In pratice it seems that this
list is mostly for "press release" style impersonal
data dumps from one list participant. Nothing wrong
with that, if that's what the person [people] who post
want to talk about. However, this list would be more
interesting and relevant to me if it talked about
specific strategies for advocacy within the LP (or
outside of it for that matter) and less about
theoretical polisci stuff.

Mind you, polisci theory has its place and is valuable
in measured doses to the kind of discourse i was
hoping to find here. I'm just sorry there's not more
analysis of how we can take these wonderful electoral
schemes and help key LP people get more fully behind
them.

If what i'm looking for just isn't the purpose of this
list, that's fine. No shame in misunderstanding the
purpose of the list. Just send me a kind reply and

But in case what i'm looking for really IS the purpose
of this list, lemme throw something out. I think i've
Would it be reasonable to ask the LP to support a
"third party coalition" for the express purpose of
getting IRV/PR in place? Or more to the point: would
you vote for a Green governor if you knew the Greens
were willing to vote for a LP sec'y of state, and both
would support IRV and PR?

(And for a bonus topic: does my state, Massachusetts,
need to have two-party rule before it can have
multi-party rule?)

OK. If i'm way out of bounds to ask these questions,
just let me know.

thx,

Philip

*DISCLAIMER: I'm not very active in LP stuff at all.
It's one of those things that, if i had more time or
financial resources, i would love to be more involved
in. Perhaps that disqualifies me from having a
relevant opinion to the purpose of this list, or
perhaps that's all the more relevant because this list
could help me devote those scarce resources to actions
that are most likely to change the way people get
elected.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com
• We need to concentrate on educating the masses instead of each other. Our goal should be destroying the myth of the Two Party system. Therefore, our efforts
Message 3 of 11 , Apr 14, 2003
• 0 Attachment
We need to concentrate on educating the masses instead of
each other.

Our goal should be destroying the myth of the Two Party
system. Therefore, our efforts must be focused on partisan
elections.

The voters of American need to understand the importance
of free and open debate and the importance of limiting government
because legislatures are instruments of the use of coercion.

Bringing the use of ranked or other methods of voting into
the LP is not an appropriate use of our time. Putting Proportional
Representation into the LP Platform is an appropriate use of our
time. Once that is done, we must move on to educating the masses.

It is in the arena of legislative government where all the differing
views must be expressed and where ensuring debate is essential.
Our efforts here must be to promote PR for our large legislative
bodies at the state and national level where it will do the most good.

Can we begin by getting video explaining PR onto our local public
access TV channels? I do a weekly show in San Luis Obispo County.
I would love to air educational videos on PR. I need materials and
permission to air them.

Liberty,
gail lightfoot
• Gail: PR is in the LP Platform. It was voted in at the July 2002 convention. Bill Redpath ... From: To: Sent:
Message 4 of 11 , Apr 14, 2003
• 0 Attachment
Gail: PR is in the LP Platform. It was voted in at the July 2002
convention. Bill Redpath
----- Original Message -----
From: <gkLtft@...>
To: <LibPR@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: [LibPR] A humble question: what exactly is this list for?

> We need to concentrate on educating the masses instead of
> each other.
>
> Our goal should be destroying the myth of the Two Party
> system. Therefore, our efforts must be focused on partisan
> elections.
>
> The voters of American need to understand the importance
> of free and open debate and the importance of limiting government
> because legislatures are instruments of the use of coercion.
>
> Bringing the use of ranked or other methods of voting into
> the LP is not an appropriate use of our time. Putting Proportional
> Representation into the LP Platform is an appropriate use of our
> time. Once that is done, we must move on to educating the masses.
>
> It is in the arena of legislative government where all the differing
> views must be expressed and where ensuring debate is essential.
> Our efforts here must be to promote PR for our large legislative
> bodies at the state and national level where it will do the most good.
>
> Can we begin by getting video explaining PR onto our local public
> access TV channels? I do a weekly show in San Luis Obispo County.
> I would love to air educational videos on PR. I need materials and
> permission to air them.
>
> Liberty,
> gail lightfoot
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Libertarian Proportional Representation list
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
• ALL States have totally evil ANTI-Democracy gerrymander/ plurality regimes -- the D/R statists in State legislatures (49 States) are nominated by the various
Message 5 of 11 , Apr 14, 2003
• 0 Attachment
ALL States have totally evil ANTI-Democracy gerrymander/ plurality regimes --
the D/R statists in State legislatures (49 States) are nominated by the
various left/right special interest gangs and later elected in gerrymander
districts. NE has a nonpartisan legislature.

That is - about half the votes in half the gerrymander districts controls --

Due to plurality primaries (40 States) (top 2 runoff primaries in 10 States)
the *real* D/R minority rule math is about 10-15 percent -- in open seats
many later general election winners get about 35-40 percent of the primary
votes in the D or R primary (that has about 25 percent of the voters).

The various national and state clubby LP regimes ignore such ANTI-Democracy
math at their peril.

Result -- U.S.A. and State politics is brain dead. The leaderships of both
the D and R gangs in the U.S.A. Congress and every State legislature are
totally evil leftwing/ rightwing super statists (in de facto one party *safe*
districts/ States) playing their evil games pending the next election to win
in the very few *marginal* gerrymander districts/ States.

Unfortunately I am not aware of any of the various clubby oligarchy LP
regimes (including the super-clubby national LP LNC regime) have a
proportional representation system to elect the legislative bodies for such
regimes.

Thus -- to help get p.r. into the public government regimes (to elect LP
legislators), it *may* (will ??) take the destruction of the various LP
oligarchies.

For example my local state LP just had a convention with about 10 percent of
ALL state LP members (who had the time, money and energy to show up). The new
regime was chosen by about 5-7 percent of ALL state LP members.

There are lots of delusional anarchists among the LP oligarchs in national
and state leadership positions who are not currently interested in doing
anything *substantive* to end the gerrymander ROT--- quickly heading towards
World War III, Civil War II, Great Depression II, etc.

IF and when the LP regimes become *democratic* (such as via mail ballots and
proportional representation), THEN the LP *democrats* may get the brains and
guts to do a p.r. state constitutional amendment petition in one of the
smaller States that has voter petitions for state constitutional amendments
---- ND, SD, MT, NV, NE (along with the various other third parties and the
D/R folks who are gerrymander victims in such States) (noting that even the
controlling gerrymander D/R faction in a State has lots of gerrymander
victims in many districts who never have a chance to elect a legislator of
their choice).

Pending reforms in the LP or a super statist crisis P.R. is in an education
mode.

See

A source of information on proportional representation elections --
including beginning readings, in-depth articles by scholars and
activists, an extensive bibliography, and a guide to related Web sites.

Democracy NOW via p.r. -- before it is too late --- and a monarchy-tyranny tak
es over the U.S.A.
• ... Libertarian Proportional Representation list ... There are 4 messages in this issue. Topics in this digest: 1. A humble question: what exactly is this list
Message 6 of 11 , Apr 14, 2003
• 0 Attachment
My replies indicated by ***

Rob Latham

P.S.: Anyone want to run for the board on Californians for Electoral Reform? I won't be running again because I moved out of the state. See www.fairvoteca.org and contact Steve Chessin for more details.

--------------------------------------------
Libertarian Proportional Representation list

------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are 4 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. A humble question: what exactly is this list for?
From: Philip Reed
From: "Philip"
3. Re: A humble question: what exactly is this list for?
From: gkLtft@...
4. Re: A humble question: what exactly is this list for?
From: "William Redpath"

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 14:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Philip Reed
Subject: A humble question: what exactly is this list for?

But in case what i'm looking for really IS the purpose
of this list, lemme throw something out. I think i've
Would it be reasonable to ask the LP to support a
"third party coalition" for the express purpose of
getting IRV/PR in place? Or more to the point: would
you vote for a Green governor if you knew the Greens
were willing to vote for a LP sec'y of state, and both
would support IRV and PR?

***I personally would not vote for a Green (assuming the candidate ran on the Green platform), if not for policy reasons then also for the fact that it's not rational for a person to believe that his/her vote will be the one that leads to the success or defeat of a candidate. Thus, the hypothetical horse-trade above is built on a faulty premise, i.e., that one's vote "counts." There's quite a bit of literature on libertarian policy-oriented websites that disputes that claim.***

(And for a bonus topic: does my state, Massachusetts,
need to have two-party rule before it can have
multi-party rule?)

***No. Your question reminds me of a similar statement that CVD answered in an email dated 11/15/97:

Meghan Holbrook, executive director of the Utah
late Tuesday.
``Two-party control? I'd love to have two-party
control again in Utah,'' she said, alluding to the state's
Republican dominance.
All five members of Utah's congressional delegation
are Republicans, as are four of five statewide
officeholders. And in the Legislature, Democrats
hold only 29 of the 104 seats.
``It's the American way for everyone to be heard,''
Holbrook added, ``but it's important for us to go back
to a two-party system in this state before we talk about
any type of proportional formulas.''
[CV&D NOTE: CATCH A CLUE! YOU NEED PR
TO AVOID MONOPOLY POLITICS!]

OK. If i'm way out of bounds to ask these questions,
just let me know.

thx,

Philip

***I don't think that you're way out of bounds in asking your question nor are you DQ'd from having a relevant opinion because you're not very active.

FWIW, I appreciate the statistical posts, but confess to not understanding half of them. Still, I think this group is as good a place as any to archive the statistics for future reference and as more LPers become more savvy to their meaning and significance.

As your disclaimer below notes, you're not very active in the LP because of other commitments. Join the crowd. You've had two responses to your post from long-time LP activists who, if they're like me, would love nothing more than for PR to be implemented across the U.S., but other activities have more priority. And talk is cheap. Which is perhaps why it's a good thing that there's a dearth of just talk here.***

*DISCLAIMER: I'm not very active in LP stuff at all.
It's one of those things that, if i had more time or
financial resources, i would love to be more involved
in. Perhaps that disqualifies me from having a
relevant opinion to the purpose of this list, or
perhaps that's all the more relevant because this list
could help me devote those scarce resources to actions
that are most likely to change the way people get
elected.

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 21:16:31 -0000
From: "Philip"

After my message i went back and checked the archives to see what
kind of discussion was on this list beforehand. It looked much more
like what i was hoping to find.

I can dig back through the archives to answer my own question, but to
some who were around at inception, what happened? Is the range of
PR-related topics just too narrow to foster much debate over the long
haul?

***Without looking at the archives, I don't know how much this group's former moderator, Bruce Baechler -- who passed away a few years ago -- drove the conversation. I've tried to contact Yahoo! to assign a new moderator to this group, but so far to no avail. It seems to run pretty well without a moderator, IMHO (those with qualms about anarchy take notice ;-)***

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 13:12:20 EDT
From: gkLtft@...
Subject: Re: A humble question: what exactly is this list for?

We need to concentrate on educating the masses instead of
each other.

***As a board member of CFER, let me offer my perspective on what that organization's strategy is. CFER believes that electoral reform in the U.S. is a marathon, not a sprint, and that to increase the implementation of ranked choice elections in the U.S., it's easiest to get them implemented at the organizational and local level first.

Although I'm thrilled that the LP supports IRV and PR in the national platform, I still think there's plenty of work to be done in the LP. I'd like to see the national, state, and local party bylaws changed so that LP officers are elected by either IRV or PR as the office warrants. (I believe that someone has posted an attempt at such bylaws at this group's archives.) I agree with statements made earlier in this group that LP elections should be conducted using IRV and PR by a mail-in ballot -- we'd get a lot more members involved in the operation of the LP that way.

I believe that if the LP does that, it will create many more "electoral reform evangelists" and change agents.

By the way, CFER worked out a deal with Voting Solutions to send copies of its election software, ChoicePlusLite(TM), to organizations in California to get them in the habit of conducting ranked choice elections.

The only requirement is that CFER would provide the technical support to those organizations. If you want to inquire whether Voting Solutions will offer your organization a similar deal, visit:

Our goal should be destroying the myth of the Two Party
system. Therefore, our efforts must be focused on partisan
elections.

***I am all for LP candidates building awareness of IRV and PR during their campaigns (see, e.g., Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean's promotion of IRV), but I think we're fooling ourselves if we think that LP candidates can prevail in the vast majority of winner-take-all elections just by devoting more time and resources to their campaigns. Winner-take-all is rigged against non-incumbent party candidates. That's why I'm working to replace winner-take-all with PR and IRV.

I think a great way to make inroads for PR and IRV is to contact elected LP officials and ask them to propose the implementation of those electoral systems for their elections. Special service district and city council elections are ideal organizations to implement PR. Model legislation is at CVD's website.

See generally http://www.fairvote.org

How San Francisco conducts its IRV elections for the first time this November will be watched by many people. For those of us not in the S.F. Bay Area and who can influence the success of that election, let's hope it goes well because many other communities are watching.***

Can we begin by getting video explaining PR onto our local public
access TV channels? I do a weekly show in San Luis Obispo County.
I would love to air educational videos on PR. I need materials and
permission to air them.

Liberty,
gail lightfoot

***Contact the Center for Voting and Democracy (they have videos for sale or you might be able to talk them into giving you the videos): www.fairvote.org

Or contact Californians for Electoral Reform (they may be able to loan you videos or send a speaker down for your program): www.fairvoteca.org

I doubt that CVD would have a problem with permissions.***

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
• Mr. Redpath wrote- Gail: PR is in the LP Platform. It was voted in at the July 2002 convention. ... D- What is the clubby LP LNC (and especially the LP News)
Message 7 of 11 , Apr 14, 2003
• 0 Attachment
Mr. Redpath wrote-

Gail: PR is in the LP Platform. It was voted in at the July 2002

convention.
-----
D- What is the clubby LP LNC (and especially the LP News) and the various
State LP regimes doing to attack (and/or educate about) the various
ANTI-Democracy indirect minority rule gerrymanders used to choose the current
super-statist gerrymander oligarchies in the U.S.A. Congress and every State
legislature ???

The U.S.A. Congress and State legislature regimes are all very dangerous
elective oligarchies (based on third grade gerrymander math -- pack the most
political enemy gang possible into the fewest districts -- try and win the
remaining districts with your gang) -- just over half the votes in just over
half the districts for Donkey/ Elephant control.

Many of them are de facto monarchies due to having ONE party hack leader in a
house of the legislative body involved controlling the lawmaking.

A powermad statist in the White House can now probably overthrow the entire
regime (i.e. destroy the Constitution) and have a Roman Empire type absolute
monarchy/tyranny (due to the accumulated special interest statism in the
gerrymander laws since 4 July 1776). --- all akin to Octavian destroying the
Roman Republic and becoming Augustus Caesar.

The LNC clubby regime parties on - playing its continuous games and
machinations.
• In a message dated 4/14/2003 5:11:15 PM EST, Demorep1@aol.com writes:
Message 8 of 11 , Apr 16, 2003
• 0 Attachment
In a message dated 4/14/2003 5:11:15 PM EST, Demorep1@... writes:

<< Unfortunately I am not aware of any of the various clubby oligarchy LP
regimes (including the super-clubby national LP LNC regime) have a
proportional representation system to elect the legislative bodies for such
regimes.
>>
Organizations do not make law, they exist as voluntary associations
which must please the membership or die. Note: The LP appears to prove
this since without the support of its members and especially its activists
and candidates it, like any voluntary organization, cannot long survive.

By concentrating on the value of Proportional Representation for large
governing bodies empowered to pass laws we use our limited time and
energy for what truly matters.
gail lightfoot
CA Libertarian for US Senate, 2000, 2004
• G.L. wrote in part- Organizations do not make law, they exist as voluntary associations which must please the membership or die. Note: The LP appears to prove
Message 9 of 11 , Apr 16, 2003
• 0 Attachment
G.L. wrote in part-

Organizations do not make law, they exist as voluntary associations
which must please the membership or die. Note: The LP appears to prove
this since without the support of its members and especially its activists
and candidates it, like any voluntary organization, cannot long survive.

---
D- It is hypocritical (to put it mildly) for the LP to calling for P.R. in
the LP Platform and NOT have P.R. in electing the LP LNC and all other
state/local LP legislative bodies.

The lack of P.R. and the failure to have separation of legislative and
executive powers in the LP LNC has been a major factor in the invisibility of
the LP among the general public for the last 30 years.

Democracy NOW in all regimes (even clubby voluntary regimes) (via p.r.)
before it is too late.
• I agree with the comment below about hypocrisy. I succeeded (after trying for 8 years) in getting PR into the LP platform (probably it wouldn t have happened
Message 10 of 11 , Apr 16, 2003
• 0 Attachment
I agree with the comment below about hypocrisy. I succeeded (after trying
for 8 years) in getting PR into the LP platform (probably it wouldn't have
happened without keynote speaker Otto Guevara's plug for it at the July 2002
convention) but have gone essentially nowhere in trying to get the LNC
(except officers) elected at large with STV. People are hung up on keeping
regional LNC reps. While I don't have anything against them personally,
there is no justification for it. There are not regional interests within
the LP. Bill Redpath

----- Original Message -----
From: <Demorep1@...>
To: <LibPR@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 3:44 PM
Subject: [LibPR] RE: A humble question: what exactly is this list for?

> G.L. wrote in part-
>
> Organizations do not make law, they exist as voluntary associations
> which must please the membership or die. Note: The LP appears to prove
> this since without the support of its members and especially its
activists
> and candidates it, like any voluntary organization, cannot long survive.
>
> ---
> D- It is hypocritical (to put it mildly) for the LP to calling for P.R. in
> the LP Platform and NOT have P.R. in electing the LP LNC and all other
> state/local LP legislative bodies.
>
> The lack of P.R. and the failure to have separation of legislative and
> executive powers in the LP LNC has been a major factor in the invisibility
of
> the LP among the general public for the last 30 years.
>
> Democracy NOW in all regimes (even clubby voluntary regimes) (via p.r.)
> before it is too late.
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Libertarian Proportional Representation list
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
• We have made some progress in Washington State. We have amended our bylaws so that we use IRV to elect officers if more than two candidates are running and we
Message 11 of 11 , Apr 20, 2003
• 0 Attachment
We have made some progress in Washington State. We have amended our bylaws
so that we use IRV to elect officers if more than two candidates are running
and we use PR to elect members of our judicial Committee. For three years I
chaired a study of election methods for the League of Woman Voters of
Washington. In that process we put together some interesting charts which
showed how our election system distorts Washington voter's representation in
Congress, in the State Legislature, at the County Council level and at the
City level. Then we use a mock election (favorite ice cream flavors) to
compare Choice Voting and Winner-take-all voting. We look for opportunities
to speak to organizations and students. It is a long slow education
process. One thing that our charts show - In Washington State most of us
don't even have a TWO party system. Most of us live in carefully crafted
one party districts. So when we are making our pitch to R's and D's we
point out that the greatest beneficiaries of a proportional voting system
will be R's who live in D districts and D's who live in R districts. If we
are going to modernize election law we need to educate the R's and D's.
Janet,
Seattle
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Redpath" <wredpath@...>
To: <LibPR@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: [LibPR] RE: A humble question: what exactly is this list for?

> I agree with the comment below about hypocrisy. I succeeded (after trying
> for 8 years) in getting PR into the LP platform (probably it wouldn't have
> happened without keynote speaker Otto Guevara's plug for it at the July
2002
> convention) but have gone essentially nowhere in trying to get the LNC
> (except officers) elected at large with STV. People are hung up on
keeping
> regional LNC reps. While I don't have anything against them personally,
> there is no justification for it. There are not regional interests within
> the LP. Bill Redpath
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Demorep1@...>
> To: <LibPR@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 3:44 PM
> Subject: [LibPR] RE: A humble question: what exactly is this list for?
>
>
> > G.L. wrote in part-
> >
> > Organizations do not make law, they exist as voluntary associations
> > which must please the membership or die. Note: The LP appears to prove
> > this since without the support of its members and especially its
> activists
> > and candidates it, like any voluntary organization, cannot long
survive.
> >
> > ---
> > D- It is hypocritical (to put it mildly) for the LP to calling for P.R.
in
> > the LP Platform and NOT have P.R. in electing the LP LNC and all other
> > state/local LP legislative bodies.
> >
> > The lack of P.R. and the failure to have separation of legislative and
> > executive powers in the LP LNC has been a major factor in the
invisibility
> of
> > the LP among the general public for the last 30 years.
> >
> > Democracy NOW in all regimes (even clubby voluntary regimes) (via p.r.)
> > before it is too late.
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > Libertarian Proportional Representation list
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Libertarian Proportional Representation list
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.