Several of Japan's high courts have called the 2012 election unconstitutional because of malapportionment. But the continued use of winner-take-all elections is the deeper cause of Japan's distorted electoral outcomes.

You don't have to sacrifice voter choice in order to guarantee accountable governments in a choice voting system - either in Malta or in the U.S. 

Malta's ultra-high-turnout elections demonstrate some of the many benefits that the choice voting form of fair voting could bring to legislative elections in the United States.

Among news coverage surrounding the upcoming landmark Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which will decide the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, Jerome Gray has received partiuclar attention.. Gray has had a remarkable career as a community organizer, including helping to make sure fair voting systems were effective for African American voters.

Many election experts ignore fair voting reform solutions because they believe them to be politically infeasible. But the only way for fair voting to become achievable is for those who know about it to start talking about the positive impact it could have on American politics.

In the aftermath of Italy's general election on February 25-26, outgoing Prime Minister Mario Monti asserted that "no country has such a bad electoral law as Italy." That may be an exaggeration, but there was plenty to be dissatisfied with in the election results.

On February 27, the U.S. Supreme Court will hold oral arguments in the case of Shelby County v. Holder, reviewing the constitutionality of Section 5 "preclearance" provisions of the Voting Rights Act. A largely overlooked part of the case is the fact that Section 5 was the reason that Calera, a growing city in Alabama's Shelby County just south of Birmingham, adopted one of the fair voting systems we recommend to uphold voting rights.

Independent redistricting continues to gain attention as the panacea for American congressional elections. But as the independent redistricting's performance in California shows, on its own it cannot resolve the most serious problems with our congressional elections. We need to combine independent redistricting with adoption of fair voting plans.

The idea of electing the president with a creative alternative map of the United States in which every state has equal population has drawn sympathetic support from Atlantic writer Jim Fallows. But uneven population of states has little to do with what's broken in presidential elections, just as equal population congressional districts leave us with broken U.S. House elections. We must free ourselves from geographic boundaries and go to the real meaning of one-person, one-vote with the National Popular Vote plan for president and fair voting for Congress.

President Barack Obama has a lot on his mind these days, but the state of our democracy remains critical. Fortunately, judging by Obama's record in the Illinois Senate --where he was the prime sponsor of legislation to advance cumulative voting and instant runoff voting - we haven't had a president as informed about good ideas for taking on electoral reform since James Madison and the founding generation.