Debating Electronically

Here is a helpful article pointing to a new way of exercising democratic power
The Future of Debating in an Electronic Democracy
Written by William J. Kelleher

When Democratic presidential candidate Senator Hillary Clinton recently issued a debate challenge to her Democratic rival Senator Barack Obama, she urged him to face off with her in a debate without a moderator, Lincoln-Douglas style. He refused, saying he already debated Clinton 21 times, "the most in primary history." But Clinton may be on to something. With the help of electronic campaigning and Internet voting, here is my suggestion for the right way to use debates to choose a President.

I propose taking advantage of an electronic debate process by organizing a Presidential Election Competition, from local roots to national champion. Internet voting can make this possible, if we use it sensibly. We can reorganize the debate and presidential process to make full use of existing electronic voting technology, and make the process 10 times more democratic!

I suggest calling this "The State Selection Debates." It could start on the same day in each state. These would be real debates, not softball news conferences -- with two contenders at a time. These could be one-hour debates, starting with opening statements, then rebuttals, a period of spontaneous interchange, and closing statements.

The debates could be broadcast on statewide TV, the Internet, cellphone lines, podcasts, and mobile Internet devices. After each debate, the voters in every state can cast their ballots electronically to determine the winner [Ed. note: American Idol style]. As I discussed in an earlier ThinkerNet post about Internet Voting, the electronic balloting process can be as secure and precise as a bank transfer.

A preference vote can be used to reduce the possibility of a tie. The voter can rank each debater from 1 to 10. This would make the vote a better reflection of the voter's judgment than would a mere up or down vote. Let's say each state holds two one-hour debates. On one day, four hopefuls would have their chance to be considered by the electorate. With 50 states, there would be 200 candidates being given a fair chance to run for president.

Suppose a state has a dozen qualified contenders. In three evenings the voters could select six winners. The next week, three debates would result in three winners. A round of debates a week later would produce The State Champion.

Sound complicated? Actually, it's not. All it would take is just adapting the organization principles of systems that we know work well. Consider, for example, the Miss America Beauty Pageant and the Golden Gloves Boxing Tournament. Here are two homegrown competitions, as American as red, white, and blue. They are also organizational models for the way to organize a Presidential Election Competition.

In the current system, the two political parties each give us a handful of party insiders. They engage in a spending contest on TV advertising. Iowa and New Hampshire get first pick. Voters in the other 48 states sit around twiddling their thumbs with nothing to do.

Internet voting can make all states equals. Then there would be 50 State Champions. In the following week, a couple of rounds of Regional Debates could bring this down to four finalists. Later, two evenings of debates, followed by e-voting would settle the question. The President is the top vote getter, and the Vice President, the second vote getter.

If boxers and beauty queens can understand the rules of their respective competitions, the American voters can understand both this proposed process, and how much more democracy Internet voting can give them.

— William J. Kelleher, PhD, political analyst, author of Progressive Logic and The New Election Game