Home Uncategorized New York Times Invites Letters on Whether a Multiparty System Would be Beneficial to U.S.

New York Times Invites Letters on Whether a Multiparty System Would be Beneficial to U.S.

The December 11 New York Times carries a letter to the editor from Peter Bartelmus of New York. The letter advocates a multi-party system for the United States. An editors’ note underneath the letter says, “We invite readers to respond briefly by Thursday for the Sunday Dialogue. We plan to publish responses and a rejoinder in the Sunday Review. Email: letters@nytimes.com.

7 Responses

  1. The American people desperately need a few parties that refuse to climb into the pockets of corporate lobbies. The military budget has become a feeding trough for War on Terrorism contractors, while bipartisan austerity policies force the rest of us to pay for Wall Street’s greed and criminal recklessness.

    Even Obamacare, despite some positive reforms, imposes a public subsidy to the insurance industry. Rancorous competition between Democrats and Republicans often conceals the shared premise of both parties that corporate profits and power trump the public interest.

    2012 presidential nominee Jill Stein and other Green Party candidates offered an alternative vision in their “Green New Deal” (http://www.jillstein.org/green_new_deal). The 2012 election year might have have unfolded differently if the Green New Deal had been familiar to more voters.

    (Note: I serve as national media coordinator for the Green Party of the United States.)

  2. Here is the one I submitted today…

    *Since the two entrenched parties are funded largely by the same sources one could say we need a second party, one that genuinely represents the people’s interest over the interests of large financial and industrial concerns. We have multiple parties but only two are funded so only two are players in the game and two parties are easy to corrupt in such a system. We will need publicly funded elections and a new monetary system in order to get a clean slate and I think it will require a Green Party electoral revolution to make those changes.*

  3. Peter Moody

    Thanks for posting this so readers could submit letters! I sent in one, but it was over twice the recommended limit for NYT letters, so I have my doubts that it will get published in full (if at all.)

  4. Had Richard Winger and Ballot Access News understood pure proportional representation (PR) over the past two decades than we’d be a lot further along. Unfortunately, interest in the “power grab” has trumped any headway for PR in the environment surrounding his work.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>