The Government of Iceland launched ideas for changes of the constitution concerning the country´s president, seeking comments from the public. The following comment was sent 21 of July 2020.

.... first and foremost that it can be maintained that certain democratic methods are better than others..

Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, political scientist,         
professor University of Copenhagen                
An excerpt from a review on Democracy with
Sequential Choice and Fund Voting



To limit how often a president can be reelected

Suppose a case, in the approach of a presidential election, where 60% of the electorate exclude the reelection of president A, while 40% prefer him reelected. There are three other candidates, B, C and D, which are supported by 25%, 20% and 15%. The opinion 60% of the electorate adhere will therefore not be realized.

Applying Sequential Choice this will not happen. Then, those who exclude the reelection of A order B,C,D; C,D,B,A; D,B,C; B,CD,A and so on. Here it is unavoidable that one of the three, B, C and D, gets more points than the points A receives from the 40%, cf. four articles in Democracy with Sequential Choice and Fund Voting in Chapter II. Sequential Choice, A. Presentation and examples, i.e.,

1. A new candidate does not give victory to the main opponent,
2. No need to hold elections in two rounds,
3. Electing a new candidate or an incumbent, a man or a woman, and
4. Acceptance of Sequential Choice.

To make the election of a president more solid

In this connection there is a reason to study in the book Sequential choice and fund voting—Status in 2018: Articles and comments since 2003, article 16, How the presidential election becomes the more trustworthy the more candidates there are.


A procedure for a revision of the constitution

Here, there is a reason to refer to article 9 in Sequential choice and fund voting—Status in 2018: Articles and comments since 2003, Constitutional assembly: election and voting, and article 20, The presentation of issues and the expressing of opinions through sequential choice and fund voting. There it shows how an attempt to engage MPs and vice MPs to deal with issues in fund voting failed. Nevertheless, there is a reason to consider the possibility to apply fund voting to prepare inside the Parliament changes of the constitution.

(translated from the Icelandic, with small changes)