寧語藍實習日誌12: 與山姆會面

 與山姆會面

今天，我和Sam進行了一次非常有啟發性的會面。 Sam是台灣公民參與協會的常務監事。我們見面討論了他發表的一篇題為《反對票可以改善所有民主政體》的文章。鑑於文章的內容，我原以為Sam在加入台灣公民參與協會之前，應該有政治學、研究或政府的背景。然而，事實並非如此！ Sam告訴我，他16歲時移居美國，在那裡完成了高中學業，之後進入哈佛大學攻讀金融學士學位（哇！）。畢業後，他又進入賓州大學華頓商學院攻讀MBA（再次令人驚嘆！）。之後，他成為華爾街一家商業銀行的投資銀行家，並有機會環遊世界，直到2005年退休。

        他說自己大約在2012-2013年開始參與公民事務，這讓我立刻好奇是什麼讓他對政治議題產生了興趣。他告訴我，當他去以色列出差時，和一些同事討論了他們對以色列政治體制的不滿。以色列實行多黨制政府和全國比例代表制選舉制度；這使得宗教極端組織能夠對國家政策有不成比例的影響力，儘管以色列也有大量中間派、無黨派選民。

        這讓我想起了我在學校學過的「少數人的暴政」概念，即少數有組織的團體能夠控制政府，阻撓政策制定，而不是讓大多數人參與。這些人經常鼓吹敵對的、親戰的政策，要求以色列公民應徵入伍，但由於宗教豁免，他們不必讓自己的孩子去參加他們支持的戰爭。於是，他在冥想時想到了投下「反對票」的想法。如果人們能夠對這個政黨投下“反對票”，就能清楚地表明他們在選民中有多麼不受歡迎。

        本文的主要論點是，現代民主制度存在一個致命缺陷，即不允許公民對任何特定候選人投下「反對」票。作者認為，鑑於美國超過70%的選舉都是無人競爭的，投下「反對」票是一項基本權利。在本文所提出的製度中，如果有兩位候選人，選民可以對其中一位投下「贊成」票，也可以對其中一位投下「反對」票。也就是說，如果兩位候選人競選某個職位，選民表達意見的選擇就從兩種變成了四種。若兩位候選人的得票數均未達淨正數，則必須重新舉行選舉。作者認為，這項方案將激勵中間派、無黨派選民參與投票，進而提高投票率，同時也將激勵黨派政治人物努力爭取獨立選民的支持。

        此外，這將促使許多政黨的競選策略不再是“互相攻擊”，而是迫使他們證明自身優勢，而不是一味地詆毀對方。

他認為，即使在擁有悠久民主歷史的國家，民主也還有很大的進步空間。退休後，他的主要目標是協助推動直接民主項目，他認為直接民主對於補充代議制民主至關重要。正是出於這種理念，他得以在台北成功推行網路投票提案。此前，所有簽名都必須以紙本形式收集——一項提案就需要多達30萬個簽名！他主要透過與大學室友共同創立的非政府組織「平衡投票倡議」（Balanced Ballot Initiative）來推廣他的理念，該組織主要從事教育工作。

        他也參加國際論壇和會議，並撰寫論文來傳播這一理念。他最初希望在加州柏克萊市推行負面投票制，因為柏克萊是一個進步的城市，他甚至向市議員提出了這個想法。後來，由於其他團體當時也在柏克萊市推動排序複選制投票，他決定將精力集中在埃爾索雷諾市。這主要是因為台灣是特許城市，擁有自己的憲法，可以自行訂定選舉規則。現在，我對台灣的公投議題很感興趣！

Meeting with Sam

Today, I had a very insightful meeting with Sam, the executive supervisor of the Taiwan Citizen Participation Association. We met to discuss his article, "No Votes Can Improve All Democracies." Given the content of the article, I assumed Sam had a background in political science, research, or government before joining the Taiwan Citizen Participation Association. However, that wasn't the case! Sam told me he moved to the United States at 16, completed high school there, and then went on to study for a bachelor's degree in finance at Harvard University (wow!). After graduating, he went on to pursue an MBA at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania (again, amazing!). He then became an investment banker at a commercial bank on Wall Street, with the opportunity to travel the world until his retirement in 2005.

He said he started getting involved in civic affairs around 2012-2013, which immediately piqued my curiosity about what sparked his interest in political issues. He told me that when he traveled to Israel on business, he discussed his dissatisfaction with the Israeli political system with some colleagues. Israel operates under a multi-party system and a proportional representation electoral system; this allows religious extremist groups to exert disproportionate influence over national policy, despite a large centrist and independent electorate.

This reminds me of the concept of "tyranny of the minority" I learned in school—the ability of a small, organized group to control the government and obstruct policy-making decisions within their own faction instead of involving the majority. These individuals often advocate hostile, pro-war policies and demand that all Israeli citizens be required to enlist, but due to religious exemptions, they are not required to send their own children to the wars they support. Thus, the idea of ​​casting a "no" vote came to mind during his meditation. If people could cast a "no" vote for a party, it would clearly demonstrate how unpopular they are among voters.

The main argument of this paper is that modern democracy suffers from a fatal flaw: it does not allow citizens to cast a "no" vote for any particular candidate. The author argues that, given that over 70% of elections in the United States are uncontested, casting a "no" vote is a fundamental right. In the system proposed in this paper, if there are two candidates, voters can cast a "yes" vote for one and a "no" vote for the other. In other words, if two candidates are vying for a particular position, voters have four options for expressing their opinions instead of two. If neither candidate receives a net positive vote, a new election must be held. The author believes this scheme will incentivize centrist and independent voters to participate, thereby increasing voter turnout, while also motivating partisan politicians to strive for the support of independent voters.

Furthermore, this will force many political parties to move beyond simply attacking each other in their campaign strategies, compelling them to demonstrate their own strengths rather than merely discrediting their opponents.

He believes that even in countries with long histories of democracy, there is still significant room for improvement. After retiring, his primary goal is to assist in promoting direct democracy projects, which he believes are crucial to complementing representative democracy. It is this belief that enabled him to successfully implement an online voting proposal in Taipei. Previously, all signatures had to be collected on paper—a single proposal required as many as 300,000 signatures! He primarily promotes his ideas through the Balanced Ballot Initiative, a non-governmental organization he co-founded with his university roommate, which focuses on educational work.

He also participates in international forums and conferences and writes papers to disseminate this concept. He initially hoped to implement negative voting in Berkeley, California, because Berkeley is a very progressive city, and he even raised the idea with city council members. Later, because other groups were also pushing for ranked voting in Berkeley, he decided to focus his efforts on El Soreno. This was mainly because it is a chartered city with its own constitution, allowing it to set its own election rules, opening up the possibility for a balanced ballot to be implemented. Now, I'm very interested in the issue of referendums in Taiwan!