4A - Thursday, January 5, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 4e Mic4t*oan wily The caucus mythology persists Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com ASHLEY GRIESSHAMMER and ANDREW WEINER JOSH HEALY EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR ogul ski runs usually happen by accident. The jutting of a left JOSEPH LICHTERMAN EDITOR IN CHIEF knee contrasts downward force of a right. A skier flows through a sine wave down the hill. More people unintention- ally cut nearly the same wave from the top of the mountain - packing snow ANDREW WEINER Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. Imran Syed is the public editor. He can be reached at publiceditor@michigandaily.com., OccUpV real ideas Congress should enhance campaign finance laws When the Occupy protests began in September in New York City, the grassroots movement against corporate greed and rising income inequality seemed poised to become a liberal equivalent to the Tea Party. Critics noted the movement's lack of central leadership, organization and a legitimate political agenda. Months after spreading from Wall Street to cities and college campus- es worldwide, the mostly peaceful protests have fallen from the media spotlight. As 2012 begins, Occupy supporters are still looking for tan- gible results. But the movement may be able to turn to Congress for action, as a Constitutional amendment has been proposed to limit the influence of corporations. Congress should pass the proposed amend- ments introduced in the spirit of Occupy and work toward limiting underneath their skis. Over time, gravity pulls more and more skiers into the same waves, which become carved into the landscape. Small hills form around the paths where the snow remains untouched. Without conscious intention, the process con- tinues until the hill becomes a mogul field - small, white islands in a lat- tice of riverbeds. Moguls are hard to ski. They require quick knees and more than a bit of tenacity. From the chairlifts, watching unskilled skiers tumble in them is a pastime for all. Caucuses have a bit in com- mon with mogul fields - they're an antique pattern states have fallen into. The meetings to pick presiden- tial nominees are supposed to be used as times for grassroots dialogue and debate before each individual votes. Caucuses are usually reserved for experts, but they each have a sig- nificant population that thinks being headstrong is enough to take them on. On Tuesday, I attended a caucus at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa hoping for some students to talk to. Not surprisingly, there weren't many in the crowd of about 200 because they're still on break. The frenzyofa nonstop press cycle fooled me into believing the caucuses themselves are exciting. I thought the buildup would culminate in intel- ligent debate from Iowans. While sit- ting behind the red rope separating observers from caucus-goers, I real- ized how wrong I was. It began a little after 7 p.m. The caucus chair, a Drake sophomore, asked for nominees to speak on behalf ofreach candidate. Speakers representing former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Pennsyl- vania Sen. Rick Santorum, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich emerged. of those who spoke, only the Gingrich and Paul representatives seemed prepared - the woman caucusingfor Romney admitted she hadn't planned on being the speaker that evening. A bowl was passed up and down the rows filled with votes written on slips of paper. The caucus organiz- ers took the makeshift ballots to a corner and counted. An older orga- nizer accidentally announced inac- curate resultsbefore the caucus chair stopped him. The real results were announced, and within minutes the room was down to about twenty people in seats and a handful more trapped in the room by pouncing reporters. My watch read 7:45. There was no debate. Not a word about Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R- Minn.), Texas Gov. Rick Perry or for- mer Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman. Their fewsupporters at the Drake were left without any voice in the proceedings. Those who did speak didn't even use all of their five-minute slots and had little substance or hard facts on their candidate's platform. There was no chance that predecided voters heard anything to change their vote. More importantly, undecided voters weren't given convincing arguments to choose a candidate. And isn't that the whole point? For a country obsessed with elec- tronic and manual election fraud, caucus-goers are given a lot of trust. Anyone could have dropped in more than one paper slip. The count took place in the corner by people who had just declared their allegiance to a candidate. There are no recounts in the Iowa caucuses - what happens, happens. Those I spoke to at the Drake caucus said how great caucuses are because voters get to mingle and talk to each other. The press loves that story. It's part of the caucuses' charm. I'm not sure, however, what they were referring to besides the speakers. Primaries are less quaint, but better for voters. Yes, it was quaint, personal and definitely grassroots. But, the pro- ceedings were unprofessional and, more importantly, not educational for voters. Caucuses exclude voters who aren't available at a certain time instead of the relative freedom of primary elec- tions. The early Iowa caucus excludes students and those serving overseas. A study from the University of Texas concluded caucuses do worse than primaries in ensuring proper demo- graphic representation. The anecdotal continuance of caucuses isn't beneficial to voters - that's why a majority of states have gotten rid of them. We've acciden- tally builtthem into mogul fields, and each year we pound the snow down tighter. - Andrew Weiner can be reached at anweiner@umich.edu. corporations' political influence. In homage to too-long acronyms, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) introduced the Outlaw- ing Corporate Cash Undermining the Pub- lic Interest in our Elections and Democracy Amendment on Nov. 18. The amendment is one of several proposals aiming to reverse the Supreme Court's opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which ruled that the First Amendment protects political donations by corporations as a form of free speech. The Citizens United decision forbade the government from limiting political dona- tions by corporations. Though American democracy is far from ideal, ashortage of corporate dollars is notpart of the problem. Despite former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's August statement that "corporations are people," U.S. citizenship should not be diluted to include for-profit cor- porations. Corporations are set up within the bounds of written law and should be regulated as such. Businesspeople can and should promote their business interests by donating to cam- paigns and political action committees. Allowing corporations unlimited campaign spending, however, enhances businesses' abil- ity to influence political campaigns. Corpora- tions should not be able to use profitsto support or oppose candidates or legislative initiatives. The OCCUPIED Amendment states that "the rights of natural persons ... do not extend to for-profit corporations." The amendment would disallow the unlimited corporate spending that has flooded elections since the landmark Citizens decision in January 2010. Corporations' political influence should be subject to government regulation, and this amendment reaffirms that. Regulation guaranteeing that donors and candidates maintain transparency in cam- paign expenditures is vital. Non-stop elec- tion cycles have created a never-ending need for campaign contributions, which can lead to clientelism that harms true representative democracy. The amendment, along with sim- ilar legislation introduced in the Senate, is an important step toward returning the control of government to living, breathing citizens instead of resource-rich corporations. National, city and campus officials have spent significant energy containing the Occupy movement's momentum. Police pep- per-spraying peaceful protesters on the Uni- versity of California-Davis campus displays these efforts at their worst. Occupy's message that the widening income gap is harmful to democracy has started important conversa- tions worldwide. It has direct implications for students - President Barack Obama widen- ing federal student loan forgiveness is one of the few tangible results of the movement. The OCCUPIED Amendment should move for- ward through Congress, and dialogue about negative implications of income inequality and corporate influence should continue. FOLLOW DAILY OPINION ON TWITTER Check us out to keep up with columnists, read Daily editorials, view cartoons and join in the discussion. @michdailyoped and @michigandaily Perfecting our elections PATRICK MAILLET I Kim Jong Un's North Korea While many students were in the basement of the Shapiro Undergraduate Library strung out on caffeine cramming for finals or already home for the holidays, a major event in world politics occurred that could have detrimental effects on the United States. On Dec. 19, North Korean state media announced that Supreme Leader Kim Jong Il had died after ruling for 17 years. Through absolute dominance of state media, military, government and nearly every other facet of North Korean society, Kim thought of himself himself as a divine leader who treated his country and his people with great morality. Call it brainwashed, call it fear- induced loyalty or call it whatever you'd like - the people of North Korea viewed their leader as a god. But what happens when a god dies? Throughout winter break, the world watched North Korea mourn its fallen leader with spectacular parades and other - some- times bizarre - displays. We watched count- less North Koreans sobbing in the streets over Kim Jong Il's death. And soon after he passed, the North Korean government declared Kim's son, Kim Jong Un, the country's new leader. Every worldwide media outlet scrambled in an effort to find out who this 20-something real- ly is. Most sources don't even know when or where he was born, and usually report his age as "28 or 29." We don't know exactly who the heir is, what his intentions are or how North Korea will change under his leadership. We do know, however, that like his father, Kir Jong Un will be very unpredictable. Perhaps the most unpredictable element of this new leader is whether he will be able to lead at all. Considering his young age and inex- perience, it's unclear whether military leaders will respect Kim Jong Un's power. According to a 2010 article in The Guardian, some of the military elite were noticeably upset when Kim Jong Un was appointed by his father as a 4-star general in 2012 though he hasn't served a single day in the military. The military could possibly see the new leader as a threat to their power and stage a coup. This option could result in violence, intervention from China or many other plau- sible scenarios - including South Korean involvement. The possibility that Kim Jong Un fears his ability to rule is being questioned not only by North Koreans, but also the entire world. In a rash, desperate maneuver to earn respect, he could act with catastrophic con- sequences. Considering that this young - and possibly reckless - new leader commands a 1.2 million-troop army, and is likely in control of a nuclear arsenal, this possibility is incredibly frightening. About one month prior to Kim Jong Il's death, President Obama announced the deployment of 2,500 marines in Darwin, Aus- tralia where they will further support our nation in the Asia-Pacific region, as reported by The Telegraph. Few deny that this was a proac- tive military move in preparation for possible conflict with China. Beijing immediately made their discontent with the deployment public, and insisted that America was inappropriately involved in foreign territories. Unfortunately for both China and the U.S., North Korea's recent shift in power could put these Marines in action much sooner than anyone imagined. China's alliance with North Korea and the United States' with South Korea could poten- tially have disastrous effects throughout the Asia-Pacific region. If North Korea - led by Kim Jong Un or another military leader - was to attack South Korea or Japan, the U.S. would have little choice but to begin military engage- ment against North Korea. Similarly, if North Korea got involved in a war against the U.S., China would have little choice but to support their ally. While this World War III scenario may seem oversimplified, it is terrifyingly realistic. As America continues to pull its troops out of the Middle East, be prepared for their pos- sible relocation. Unfortunately, this change in power could have massive global reverbera- tions. For now, we can only sit back and watch with unease as North Korea adjusts to its shift in leadership. -Patrick Maillet is an assistant editorial page editor. M ost Republicans with whom I have discussed the Republican primaries say they would like anybody but former Mas- sachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney to be the Repub- lican nominee. ' But with so many other can- didates splitting MATTHEW the vote, Rom- ZABKA ney narrowly won the Iowa caucuses and seems poised to walk away with the nomination. Assum- ing most Republicans have this "any- body but Romney" attitude, it seems unfair that he should represent the Republican Party in the general election. This raises the question of whether different voting sys- tems exist that would better reflect Republican - and more generally society's - preferences. In a ranked voting system, voters rank candidates in order of prefer- ence. The voting system then tells us society's preferences. Note that the plurality rules voting system by which Michigan elects its officials is a ranked voting system: Voters rank candidates (in their heads) and then vote for their first choice. Plurality rules tells us that the can- didate with the most first choice votes is society's preference. For example, suppose Charlie, Snoopy and Woodstock run for gov- ernor of Michigan. In the election, Charlie receives 40 percent of the vote, Snoopy receives 35 percent of the vote, and Woodstock receives 25 percent of the vote. Using a plurality rules voting system, Charlie would win the election. But what if every person who voted for Woodstock preferred Snoopy over Charlie? That is 60 per- cent of voters who would rather have Snoopy as governor than Charlie. But Charlie won the election. There would seem to be a problem with this voting system. A runoff voting system, in which more than one round of voting can take place to find a winner, seeks to rectify this problem by choosing society's preference in a different way. For example, in Louisiana's gubernatorial elections, if no candi- date receives more than 50 percent of the vote in the first round of vot- ing, a second round of voting is held between the two candidates who received the most votes in the first round. The candidate who wins the second round is elected governor. Another example of a runoff sys- tem follows: In each round, the can- didate with the fewest number of votes is eliminated. The next round of voting has only candidates who were not previously eliminated. Rounds of voting continue until a candidate receives more than half of the vote, and this candidate wins the election. This runoff system is used for city elections in Min- nesota's Twin Cities and Duluth. Ann Arbor also used it for its may- oral election in 1975. Using either of these runoff systems, Snoopy would win the above election. Readers may now ask: What is the best voting system, and why isn't it used in all elections? Before answering the question, one must first define what "best" means. Mathematicians say a perfect vot- ing system must have the following three properties: First, there is no dictator. That is, there is no voter whose vote completely determines the outcome of the election. Second, if a majority of voters prefer candi- date X over candidate Y, then the voting system should tell us society prefers candidate X over candidate Y. Third, the voting system is inde- pendent of irrelevant alternatives. This means that if the majority of voters prefer candidate X over can- didate Y and voters change their preferences for other candidates A, B, C without changing their prefer- ences for X over Y, then the voting system still tells us society prefers X over Y. We've seen above that the plu- rality rules system fails the sec- ond property, so it is not a perfect voting system. But what about the two runoff systems? They also fail the second property, so these run- off systems aren't perfect either. In fact, the mathematical economist Kenneth Arrow proved in his Ph.D. thesis the amazing 'result that, as long as more than two candidates run in an election, one can find a problem with whatever voting sys- tem is used. No perfect voting sys- tem exists. Both a plurality rules system and the runoff systems have their merits and problems. An ideal voting system doesn't exist.. I hope readers walk away with two thoughts after reading this col- umn. First, many questions - espe- cially in public policy - often have no perfect solution. Competing solu- tions can be suggested and it may be that neither is wrong. This is a theme I hope to explore in my remaining columns - disagreement and debate on such issues should be expected and encouraged. It might sound pow- erful when a politician labels his or her opponent's position as "simply wrong," but without further infor- mation and a competing position, intelligent citizens should . ignore such empty rhetoric. Second, mathematicians often work on and find answers to very interesting questions that, one would think, have nothing to do with mathematics. Question: Does a perfect voting system exist? Math's answer: No. You'll never invent one. Stop looking. Isn't that neat? -Matthew Zabka can be reached at mzbka@umich.edu. EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Aida Ali, Kaan Avdan, Ashley Griesshammer, Nirbhay Jain, Jesse Klein, Patrick Maillet, Erika Mayer, Harsha Nahata, Timothy Rabb, Vanessa Rychlinski, Sarah Skaluba, Seth Soderborg, Caroline Syms, Andrew Weiner 4