More Parties or No Parties

Americans want electoral reforms so that they can have more choice in elections. Recent surveys show that 20 to 50 percent of Americans are open to a new electoral system, while demand for a third party has crept upward since Gallup began asking in 2003. More Americans now call themselves "independent" than identify with either of the major parties, but what happens when Americans try to reform their way out of a two-party system?So far, demand for reform has found footing in a push for ranked-choice voting. In More Parties or No Parties, Jack Santucci traces the origins and performance of proportional representation in US cities, the reasons for repeal in all but one case, and discusses the implications of this history for current reform movements in US cities and states, as well as at the national level. In a two-party system, reform requires appealing to the group that wants to "get the parties out ofpolitics" (or, in modern terms, to "reduce polarization"). This leads to ostensibly nonpartisan reform packages, yet party-like formations emerge anyway, as voters and governments need to be organized. However, such reform is not stable and has tended to make voting difficult for everyday people. Introducing a new shifting-coalitions theory, Santucci argues that electoral reform is likely in periods of party-system instability. The players, according to this theory, are politicians and allied interest groups, motivated to get or keep control of government. Reform can be used to insulate a coalition, dislodge a coalition in power, or deal with noncommittal "centrists." The theory also suggests why reform happens, illuminates why reforms take the shapes that they do, and shows what itmight take to make a government reform itself. Using roll-call, election, and other archival data, the book answers several questions: why electoral reforms were adopted, how they worked in practice, why they were repealed, and why only "ranked-choice" was considered in the first place. Drawing onextensive research in cities with experience of proportional representation, Santucci provides a timely and insightful theory of electoral reform with advice for the next generation of reformers.

Regardless of which proportional system one supports, it is important to try to account for the lessons of history. Readers may disagree on what exactly those lessons are, but they would do well to grapple with Santucci's work., [A] 'must read' for any of us interested in the possibility of electoral reform along the lines of ranked-choice voting., Santucci makes excellent use of an innovative political theory and a diversity of historical sources to illuminate the 20th century efforts at electoral reform that took place in US cities. His research is meticulous and his conclusions are insightful. He points out the mistakes made by these early reformers, then offers valuable advice about the potential paths to reform that can be pursued by contemporary electoral reform advocates., This superb, innovative analysis first distinguishes and pries apart the many variants of electoral reform and then combines everything into one comprehensive theory that is strong and convincing. A major scholarly achievement and a hugely important contribution to the field of electoral systems research., With the lens of his "shifting coalitions" theory of electoral reform, Santucci takes the reader on a deep dive into the American experience with proportional representation at the local politics level, connecting the nature of the reform coalition to the outcomes of reform. A must-read for anyone interested in what is possible for the future of American democracy, and in how much those possibilities depend upon the political maneuvering of reformers versus the details of the reforms themselves.

Jack Santucci is Assistant Teaching Professor of Politics at Drexel University, focusing on American party politics and electoral systems.