In the Bible, lots were often used to make tough decisions. Joshua apportioned the land of Canaan to the Israelite tribes by lot, for example. In the Roman Empire, some official positions were filled by lot. There is something completely democratic about selecting someone for a job using nothing more than what anthropoligists call sortilege, but what most of us would call “picking a name at random.”
I’ve always thought that, given the median quality of our elected leaders, we could do worse than determining our representatives by lot. It works for jury duty, doesn’t it? We pick people at random to decide on suspects’ guilt or innocence (and possibly their life and death). Would it really be that much different to use a lottery to select an office-holder from a group of qualified candidates? Some people think not.
Anyway, China is way ahead of the curve on this one (or behind it), because in Hong Kong legislative elections, a tie isn’t broken by a runoff election, but the literal luck of the draw. Remember that this is the city that recently had a major insecting-fighting betting ring broken up. During my research for ROLL THE BONES, I have learned that cricket-fighting was actually a real sport in ancient China, and there was very heavy action on it.
Well here is the story, from yahoo.com:
It may sound more like bingo than politics, but under Hong Kong electoral rules, the tied candidates must each pick a ball at random. Whoever pulls out the highest number takes office.
The last candidate to be defeated by drawing a low number doesn’t think too much of the system, but election officials call it fair, cost-effective and in keeping with Hong Kong people’s traditional belief in fate.
The prospects of a tie in Hong Kong’s Sept. 12 legislative elections may be remote, but officials have stocked up on dozens of pingpong balls just in case, said Registration and Electoral Office spokesman Joseph Wong.
Hong Kong last saw two candidates drawing for lucky numbers in 1999, when Peter Lau and Wan Yee-chung tied in a local council race with 820 votes each in a small suburban district.
Lau drew ball No. 5. Wan beat him with No. 9 and took office.
Election Tie? Get Out Pingpong Balls
As I said, this is actually an ancient practice that is in some ways more democratic than the system of electoral democracy.
Maybe we could decide the presidency by having a raffle to pay off the budget deficit. Instead of Democrats and Republicans spending their money (and ours–remember candidates get public funds) on ads attacking each other that only make everyone look bad, why not cut out the middleman (the voter)? Just have each party buy a bunch of raffle tickets with the cash. Then, on the first Tuesday in November, have a live drawing on TV. No more hassles with voting machines, no more having to spend time worrying about political issues that could be devoted to crappy reality TV.
With the increasing prevalence of gambling and chance in Americans’ lives, don’t be totally surprised if we start inching this way. There are certainly elements in this country that would have no quarrel with a method of picking leaders that has actual biblical sanction.