@Snarflak resolves no, vermont session is over

https://ballotpedia.org/2024_Vermont_legislative_session

Can it be re-proposed in the next session?

it can, but assuming Vermont works like all other states, that would be a different bill. you are referring to this bill

I wasn't necessarily, but yes I will resolve it based on H.424 in particular, if no one objects in the next few days.

From the source:

So, the decision was made by the legislator (and my friend), who introduced H.424, and the legislative counsel, who wrote the language, to go with Condorcet-Plurality instead of BTR-IRV. If we were to go to a technically better method, I think it would be Ranked-Pairs, but even RP was scary legislative language. Schulze even moreso. And even simple as it is, H.424 is going nowhere.

Damn.

Holy shit, there's actually an election reform bill using a decent method?

@PlasmaBallin Yes! I don't know what kind of chances it has though, or how to make it more likely to happen.

Kinda? It's decent in theory but unclear how good it would be in practice. The issue is Condorcet//Plurality is easy to game in some elections, by burying the Condorcet winner (rank them last on your ballot). This creates a fake cycle, at which point the plurality winner wins. So, if you have a situation like Alaska 2022, there's a strong incentive for Democrats to bury the compromise candidate (Begich). A Condorcet-IRV variant would've been a lot nicer, because the strategy tends to get a lot harder.

How realistic is that, though? Condorcet cycles are very rare, and a scenario in which voters can force them is also rare and requires accurate polling, no?