In a remarkable turn of events, Ed Chavez Jr. (not pictured above) became the mayor of Helper, Utah, in March 2013 after his name was drawn from a hat to break a tie in a local election. This unconventional selection followed the resignation of former Mayor Dean Armstrong, who left office amid controversy. Despite the unusual circumstances, Chavez embraced his role, collaborating with longtime friend and councilman Kirk Mascaro to serve the community until January 2014.
Chavez’s brief tenure as mayor was just one chapter in a dedicated career of public service, which included 15 years on the Wellington City Council and leadership roles within the Carbon County Democratic Party. As of 2024, he has transitioned to serve as the Secretary for Division 3 of the Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District, representing various communities and continuing his commitment to public service in a new capacity.
Lottery vs. Voting System
A lottery system for selecting qualified candidates could offer some advantages over traditional voting, but it also comes with significant drawbacks. Here’s an analysis of the pros and cons:
Pros
- Reduced corruption: A lottery system could potentially minimize the influence of money in politics, as candidates would not need to fundraise or cater to wealthy donors. This could lead to more independent decision-making.
- Increased diversity: Random selection from a pool of qualified candidates might result in a more diverse group of representatives, including individuals from underrepresented backgrounds who may struggle to win elections.
- Mitigation of voter biases: A lottery would eliminate the impact of voter biases based on factors like race, gender, or charisma, potentially leading to a more representative government.
Cons
- Lack of accountability: In a lottery system, representatives would not be accountable to voters through re-election, potentially reducing their incentive to perform well or respond to constituents’ needs.
- Competence concerns: While candidates would be “qualified,” there’s no guarantee that randomly selected individuals would possess the skills and experience necessary for effective governance.
- Loss of voter choice: Citizens would lose their ability to directly choose their representatives, which is a fundamental aspect of democratic participation.
- Potential for manipulation: Even in a lottery system, there could be attempts to influence the selection process or the representatives once chosen, potentially leading to new forms of corruption.
While a lottery system offers some intriguing possibilities for addressing current democratic shortcomings, it also presents significant challenges that would need to be carefully considered before implementation.
Read More
[1] https://www.castlecountryradio.com/2017/03/03/helper-city-mayor-ed-chavez/
[2] https://www.linkedin.com/in/ed-chavez-40778730
[3] https://www.attorneygeneral.utah.gov/three-arrests-four-expected-in-significant-human-trafficking-case-by-utah-attorney-generals-office/
[4] https://www.abqjournal.com/2446948/ex-mayor-chavez-to-serve-as-nms-infrastructure-adviser.html
[5] https://irb.utah.edu/events/speaker_bios.pdf
[6] https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/72827241.pdf
[7] https://medlabboulder.gitlab.io/democraticmediums/mediums/lottery_voting/
[8] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9165770/
[9] https://brill.com/view/journals/dyp/56/2/article-p136_003.xml?language=en
[10] https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22878118/jury-duty-citizens-assembly-lottocracy-open-democracy
[11] https://academic.oup.com/book/9173/chapter-abstract/155799682?login=false&redirectedFrom=fulltext
[12] https://isps.yale.edu/news/blog/2023/09/redefining-democracy-could-lotteries-improve-governance-and-public-trust
[13] https://thewalrus.ca/why-we-should-let-a-lottery-decide-our-government/
