Policy Proposal: Proportional Representation
             To create a utopia, the inhabitants need to be happy. To be happy, the voices and will of the people need to be heard. However, under our democracy, a large number of people are left unheard. Nearly all elections in the United States are based on the winner takes all principle. The Representative with the most votes wins the election. The winner takes all principle awards 100% of the representation to a 50.1% majority. Votes going to a losing candidate are wasted, even if that candidate takes 49.9% of the vote. If we believe in the principle of "one person, one vote," why tolerate a system which treats voters unequally? Every vote is counted, but not every vote counts. This leaves significant amount of voters unrepresented. Voters understand this possibility, and so often they do not vote for a candidate they like, but rather the one who realistically stands the best chance of winning. Many times voters vote for "the lesser of two evils," or do not bother to vote at all. An alternative to this is proportional representation.
             Proportional representation is the principle that any group of voters should win legislative seats in proportion to its share of the popular vote. Proportional representation allows voters in a minority to win their fair share of representation. This provides a more accurate and balanced representation of the people. If a party receives 30% of the vote, they receive 30% of the seats in the legislature, 10% of the vote receives 10% of the seats, and so on.
             Single seat offices like the president, governor, and mayor can't be elected with proportional representation. However, there are much better ways for electing them than winner takes all. For these elections, the voter would simply rank candidates in an order of preference (example. 1. Bush 2. Nader 3. Gore). The candidate with the least number of first place votes would be eliminated, and thei...